have Christ's Testament And having elegantly compar'd the Scripture to Man's Testament which is able to determine every Controversie that may arise among his Children adds He who leâ—t us this Testament is in Heaven let his Will therefore be sought for in the Gospel as in a Testament for the things which you now do Christ forsaw before they came to pass The same Justice and no more do we require in the present Case we require with Cyprian that Custom or Tradition which is without Scripture tho' otherways never so Old be thrown away as mouldy Errors Let not the Hope of Emoluments secular Grandeur or Power make Men rack their Wits to Dâ—prave and Detire the Truth and despise the Apostolick Humility and Parity Then saith Chrysostome speaking of these Apostolick Times and that by way of Opposition to his own Age Church-Government was not Honour or Grandeur but Watching and Care of the Flock Seeing it's evident saith Isidorus Pelusiota how vast a difference there is between the Ancient humble Ministry and the present Tyranny Why don't ye Crown with Garlands and Celebrate the Lovers of Parity or Equality Let not the gay Pageantry of foppish Ceremonies steal away our Hearts from the simplicity of the Gospel Is such trash worth the patronizing Nay rather Let the Sword of God Theâ—'re Jerome's words cut off every thing that men without the Authority and Testimony of the Scriptures have devised and pretend as if they had it by Apostolick Tradition Let all such things be broken in Pieces called Nehustan and finally sacrific'd to Truth and Peace Whatsoever thing God commands us let 's observe to do 't and neither add thereto nor diminish from 't This I'm sure is the old Path and the good Way wherein if we Walk we shall find rest to our Souls our Peace shall be as a River and our Righteousness as the Waves of the Sea we shall Dwell together in that Brotherly Vnity which is a true Antecedent of Life for evermore And thus I can freely say is the ultimat Design of Composing and Emitting the ensuing Treatise and is and still shall be the fervent Prayer of Will. Jameson Nazianzeni THE CONTENTS PART I. SECT I. The Scope of the ensuing Treatise The ancient Church for no Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy pag. 1. The ablest of its late Patrons of no other mind where Dr. Sandersone is noted 2 An examen of the Conveniencies and Inconveniencies of Prelacy undertaken 5 SECT II. The Aphorism No Bishop no King discuss'd Prelacy contributes not a little to introduce Tyranny ibid. Prelats severall ways most hurtfull to Princes 6 Presbytry well agrees with Monarchy where their Charge of Sedition and Disloyalty is largely vouch'd to be most unjust from the most applauded Writers of our Adversaries themselves 8 SECT III. Their Argument taken from Order weigh'd Their strange Improvement thereof 17 It equally serves Prelatists and Papists Ibid. SECT IV. The Plea for Prelacy drawn from Unity discuss'd Dissentions most frequent where Bishops bore sway 18 Unity and Parity harmoniously lodged in one and the same Assembly 19 SECT V. The Argument Prelatists bring from antiquity canvass'd Ibid. SECT VI. The Instance of Aërius condemn'd by Epiphanius prov'd to be unserviceable to our Antagonists They joyn with the most disingenous of Papists in using this Argument 21 The choicest of the Fathers for the Scriptural and Apostolick Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter 22 Epiphanius giveth little Patrociny to our Adversaries 23 His Injustice to Aerius in this matter ibid. If Aerius was Arrian largely disputed the affirmative whereof is rendred improbable by the profound Silence of those who were concern'd to have mention'd it 24 The Tractate ascribed to â—â—siliu◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is judgâ—d supposititious wherein there 's nothing to be found concerning Aerius This report of Aërius his Arrianism leans on Epiphanius's testimony alone whose great Levity and Credulity is universally noted 25 It is instanc'd in his dealing with the Donatists whom on no good ground he accuses of the same crime of Arrianism 26 They 're absolv'd by Augustine and Optatus Ibid. It 's objected that Aerius his commerce with Eustathius of Schastia may give countenance to the report of Epiphanius Ibid. Eustathius tho' a Heretick yet was not Arrian but a Macedonian who seems rather to have been dangerously shaken then intirely wedded to Macedonianism Ibid. But on supposition of the worst several reasons are brought making probable that nothing can be inferrâ—d from his commerce to prove Aërius Heretick 27. The loss of the Writings of the Ancient and traduced witnesses of truâ—h is lamentable Ibid. The Judgement of Philastrius concerning Aërius related against whom the Aërians are vindicated from the Crime of Encratitism 28 They were fiercely persecuted and why 29 Between Philastrius and Epiphanius no good agreement The negative testimony of both Philastrius and Rabanus Maurus against what is delivered by Epiphanius 30 SECT VII No Diocesan Bishops in several ancient Churches This Instanc'd in the Churches of Ireland of Africk and of Scotland 30 The ablest of our Adversaries brought to a sore pinch hereby 34 Sir George M ckenzie 's Epistolary Defence of Prelacy canvassed where Bede is vindicated against the Bishop of St. Asaph and Buchanan and Hector Boethius vindicated against Spotswood to whom the Advocat referred Ibid. That we had a constitute Church before the coming of Palladius evinced against both Bishop and Advocat 38 Our Primitive Doctors why called Monks The cavills of Spotswood and the Bishop of St. Asaph removed 39 Smal power of Prelats for a long time after Palladius 40 The most memorable result of the Combat between the Advocat and the Bishop of St. Asaph Ibid. D. M.'s exceptions removed His negative argument no argument 42 â—â—â—ndel vindicated 44 D. M's perversion of Baron's clear testimony detected Ibid. He in vain attempts to deprave and then to exauctorate Prosper himself 46 Other specimens of D. M's unhandsome dealing 47 SECT VIII Prelacy opposite to the Principles of our Reformers The Hierarchy is condemn'd by our Confession 49 Knox and his fellows are proved to have been most opposite to the Hierarchick Domination 50 The Author of the Fundamental Charter of Presbytry adventures not on our special Arguments Ibid. Against whom Knox's great aversness from Prelacy is evinced by vindicating of his Letter to the Assembly 51 And by vindicating of Knox's words and actions at the Installment of John Douglas 52 And from clear and unsuspected records where 't is also evinc'd that the bulk of both Ministers and People were then opposite to Prelacy 54 This Authors cavills from the meeting at Leith 7½ and from some expressions of the Assemblies canvass'd and annihilated 56 Knox's antiprelatical judgement demonstrated from Beza's Letter which is vindicated from this Authors exceptions 60 Who pretending to make Knox a Prelatist only labours to prove him and our other Reformers self-repugnant Bablers 61 His ridiculous Sophisms examin'd and expos'd
of Mentz who only informs us that the Heresie of Aërius consisted in despising Sacrifices for the Dead From all which to me it 's more than probable that there 's no ground to believe that ever Aërius Arrianiz'd Section VII No Diocesan Bishops in several Ancient Churches THo' their Argument brought from Antiquity be already satisfi'd we shall yet give some Instances of Churches which for several Centuries were really without Diocesan Bishops St. Patrick the Irish Apostle is commonly said to have ordain'd several hundreds of Bishops in Ireland who I 'm sure could not be Diocesans Dr. Maurice being displeas'd with this Instance rejects Nennius the Author from whom we have the account of St. Patrick's ordaining 365 Bishops as fabulous But it 's not in their accounts of the numbers of Bishops but of the Deeds and Miracles wrought by Bishops and others of their Saints that the fabulousness of the Writers of these times is commonly to be observ'd He next quarrels with the common reading of that Author alledging that He speaks only of the Bishops in France and Britain in communion with St. Patrick not of his Irish Bishops But I think we may in such critical Learning give Bishop Vsher the Preference who neither judg'd this Book fabulous nor its common reading to be suspected And this account of the great number of Ancient Irish Bishops is strongly confirm'd by what Clarkson cites out of Bernard and Baron shewing that there were well nigh as many Bishops as Churches This the Doctor passes over in silence which was scarce fair enough dealling Neither can the Doctor 's ordinary salvo viz. that the Practice was not generally approv'd nor of primitive Constitution here serve them for whatsoever differ'd from the Roman Model was presently made a Novelty And tho' Bernard and Lanfranc dislike the Practice of having so many Bishops yet they adventure not to instance any time wherein the Irish had been rul'd by a few Diocesans And lastly the Authors most regardable herein inform us that this Practice of having so many Bishops had place even in St. Patrick's time and meer infancy of the Irish Church § 2. Most visible footsteps of this also appear in the African Church during the time of Cyprian for in that Council of Carthage where he presided there was no smal number of Bishops conveen'd tho' doubtless there were many moe Bishops in Africk who could not be all Diocesans seeing few then were Christians in Africk save a small part of the Roman Colonies only Yea the hamlets and villages these Bishops had for their Jurisdictions are so obscure that the learn'd Pamelius is at a stand where to place them And long after in the time of the Vandalick Persecution as Victor Vticensis relates there were in the Zeugitan or proconsular Province alone 164 Bishops others reckon moe Now this was but a small part of what the Romans possess'd in Africk and few beside the Roman Colonies were at that time Christian for the Moors or old Africans who beside what they had in the Cities possess'd almost the whole Country are by the same Victor without exception call'd Gentiles and many of the Romans themselves had not yet imbrac'd Christianity Now subduce from that small number of the Zeugitan Province who were Christians the many Arrians and other Hereticks and Schismaticks whom these Bishops did not reckon as a part of their Flocks and surely there shall scare be found so many as to make up above 164 Parishes Dr. Maurice tells us that all the African Bishops in Cyprian's time could not have suppli'd the Dioceses of one Province in the V or VI Century Which if true is a strong Confirmation of what we plead for viz. that they then were nothing less than Diocesans seeing as is now evident there were even in the fifth Century but a very small number of Christians in Africk compar'd with the rest of the Inhabitans And in Cyprian's time it may well be judg'd that there were some hundreds of Bishops in the Roman Africk But in such Cases not the extent of Bounds but number of Souls is to be considered Wherefore he should be a wild Reasoner that should conclude from Africa's having a dozen or such a number of Bishops or Pastors for surely there were but few at the entry of Christianity that there needed be no more afterward and so make that number the Standard to discern how many Bishops by primitive Right were to be plac'd in all Africa And this is a Kin to what he says elsewhere that tho' there were Bishops in small Towns this was not the primitive State of the Church it may be indeed nor yet at the first entry of the Gospel were there Bishops in most part of the great Towns but was this for fear of Multiplication of Dioceses no surely but these few were all could be then gotten The substance of his Answer here is that Africa was most large fertile popolous The first of which is readily granted but the second not so easily much of these Regions being more fertile of sand and Serpents than of Corn and Wine and this in part discredits the third seeing so much as was barren is not to be suppos'd Popolous wherefore it 's surprising to find him making the Old Roman Africk more Popolous than France is now He supposes that Africk had but 500 Bishops and yet might have 40000 villages But I answer that if the villages were considerable and had Christian Inhabitants for otherways this is nothing to this purpose then had Africk 40000 Bishops for H. Thorndick acknowledges that Bishops in Africk were so plentifull that every good village must needs be the Seat of an Episcopal Church Which words of H. Thorndick are cited by Clarkson but dissembl'd by the Doctor In the mean while I can find nothing which can shake what I have said above or overturn as for example what I have noted from Victor's words and oblige me to lessen my substraction Add to what is said the words of Dr. Burnet In St. Augustin's time saith he it appears from the journals of a Conference he had with the Donatists that there were about five hundred Bishopricks in a small tract of ground But we need not cross Seas in pursuit of ancient Churches free of Diocesans seeing our Country Scotland affords us so luculent a proof of our Assertion The words of Prosper Aquitanicus in his Chronicle annex'd to that of Eusebius and Hierome are most clear and cogent Palladius saith he is ordain'd by Pope Coelestine for the Scots that had already believ'd in Christ and is sent to them to be their first Bishop Never was a passage of any Historian more universally believ'd than this of Prosper which Beda◠and a MS. Chronicle of Scotland in the Library of Glasgow yea the whole stream of Historians repeat and approve but none more amply and plainly than Cardinal Baron whose words are
All Men agree that this Nation viz. Scotland had Palladius their first Bishop from Pope Coelestine And again thus you are instructed how to refuse these who alledge that Sedulius the Christian Poet whom Pope Gelasius so much extolls had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots for seeing even Sedulius himself lav'd in the time of Theodosius the Emperor how could he have had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots seeing there was no Arch-bishop yet ordain'd in Scotland and Palladius is without debate affirm'd to have been the first Bishop of that Nation This is yet more plainly express'd by the most learn'd Antiquaries of our Country all of them agree in this that before Palladius the Church was rul'd and guided without any Diocesan Bishops For as Fordun hath it before the coming of Palladius the Scots following the Custom of the primitive Church had Teachers of the Faith and Dispensers of the Sacraments who were only Presbyters or Monks And Iohannes Major saith the Scots were instructed in the Faith by Priests and Monks without Bishops And Hector Boethius Palladius was the first of all who exercis'd any Hierarchical Power among the Scots being ordain'd their Bishop by the Pope whereas before their Priests were by the suffrages of the People chosen out of the Monks and Culdees Add hereto the known Testimony of Buchanan and of Sir Thomas Craig To pass over saith he that most silly ' Fable of the three Archflamins and the twenty eight Flamins it 's plain that there was no Bishop in Britain before Palladius who is by the English themselves call'd the Bishop of the Scots or if either the Brittons or English have any let them name them and at what time they flourish'd § 3. Yea so clear is this Truth that the most learn'd of our Adversaries have found no better way to elude when they cannot clide it than as Torniellus in another case said of Bellarmine to endeavour the penetrating of a most firm wall and cast the History about fourty of our ancient Scotish Kings as a forg'd legend Among these is Loyd Bishop of St. Asaph but both he and Dr. Stillingfleet are nervously refuted by the learn'd Sir George Mâ—kenzie Advocat and that their main purpose and undertaking was utterly desperat he makes soon appear And tho' saith he this Author could prove that we were not settl'd here before the year 503 yet that could not answer the Argument viz. that is brought against Episcopacy from the Scotish primitive Church-government for the Culdees might have been settl'd before that time And thus in a few syllables he demonstrats that the Bishop as to his ultimat design had only his labour for his cost But Sir George being too sagacious not to foresee that from the mutual strugglings between himself and the Bishop any man might easily conclude that Presbytry was the primitive Government of the Church of Scotland and having been one of the prime Instruments to put in execution the prelatical Fury judg'd himself concern'd in credit to say somewhat in favours of Episcopacy and attempt the stoping of such an Inference Wherefore to this purpose in a Letter to the Earl of Perth prefix'd to the defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland He makes several assayes The first whereof is That this is one of the meanest Arguments that ever were us'd by a Presbytâ—rian And that it is a weak Argument saith he appears from this that I have met with very few Laicks in all our Countrey who had heard of it nor with one even of these few who had valu'd it But be it so that the Argument seem mean we gain notwithstanding a most sufficient Argumentum ad hominem seeing our ablest Adversaries value it so much yea Sir George himself clearly acknowledges this while he saith and what can the Presbyterians think of their other Arguments which they value much since this which they valu'd so little is thought of such force by a learn'd Bishop as to deserve a whole book the cutting off of 44 Kings and the offending a Nation of Friends But it 's nothing tho' the Laicks had neither valu'd nor heard it seeing as himself grants Blondel with whom join the rest of the Presbyterian Writers urg'd it Hence appears that this Argument is by both Parties judg'd to be of great force and consequence for the solution whereof the Advocat brings nothing save what is altogether unworthy of any ingenous man As for example since saith he it cannot be deni'd but that these who ordain'd our Presbyters were Bishops it necessarly follows that Episcopacy was settl'd in the Christian Church before we had Presbyters or Culdees Wherein as to the solution of our Argument which was the scope of his Letter he only begs the Question and gives us what is impertinent thereto and contradicts moreover these our Historians whose credit he so excellently vindicats seeing as we heard they plainly tell us that our ancient Anti-diocesan practice was the very custom of the primitive Church And when our Historians say that the Abbots of Icolm-kill had Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of the Province that is to be understood as Beda observes more inusitato after an unusual manner And yet he compares this practice of the Abbot to that of a King who makes one a Bishop and to the practice of a Mother who makes her Son a Church-man now if it be any strange or surprising thing for a King by his Congé d'eslire to make one a Bishop or for a Mother to educate her Son in order to be a Church-man and procure some place for him let any man judge And later Historians saith the Advocat meeting with these ambigous words in our Annals Designatus Electus Ordinatus were by a mistake induc'd to appropriat these words to the formal Ceremony of Ordination and Imposition of hands As if any man in his wit could take these words to mean any other thing than Ordination providing they be as they are in our Annals spoken of one Church-man in relation to another Moreover he knew sufficiently that the best Records of our Country expresly say that our Church was rul'd by Presbyters without Bishops and so leave not the least room for tergiversation Bede is one of these Authors who creat them so much vexation for speaking of Icolm-kill the Isle saith he still uses to have for its Rector an Abbot who is a Presbyter to whose Jurisdiction the whole Province and even the Bishops themselves after an unusual manner ought to be subject according to the example of their first Teacher who was no Bishop but a Presbyter Hence it 's clear that even in Bede's time Bishops were but of smal note here and their power much less than in other Churches They are therefore much pain'd with Bede's words and chiefly St. Asaph who amongst other odd things he excogitats tells us that the Superiority this Presbyter had
over the Bishops was only in respect of the royalty of the Isle which the King gave the Abbot As if ever Bede or any man else could have mark'd such a Superiority as strange and unusual it being nothing but what every Prince or Lord of any place still practises who altho' he subject himself to a Bishop in Spirituals yet in respect of Temporals and the Royalty uses to retain the Superiority But which ' utterly spoils the Bishop's comment Bede tells that all Columbanus got was the possession of a little Isle able to sustain about five Families for building of a Monastry without the least mention of his being invested with the Royalty thereof or any other Island and yet to him were all the Bishops of the whole Province all the Bishops of Scotland saith the Saxon Chronicle cited by the Bishop himself subjected so that this pretended Royalty of Columban over the Island becomes a vain dream tho' 't were real could do him no kindness the whole Prouince being certainly a far other thing than any such Island wherefore the Superiority this Presbyter had over these Bishops must needs have been in Ecclesiastick affairs and this was really remarkable and unusual But of this enough for whosoever believes that the errand of this most ancient Preacher and Propagator of Christ's Kingdom was to win an earthly Kingdom to himself and that the King shar'd with him his Soveraignity and Realm may as soon swallow the whole legend of Constantine's Donation to Sylvester But to return to the Advocat as in the things that he touches he wholly prevaricats so he never handles our main Argument which is taken from what is related of our Churches practice preceeding the coming of Palladius He only refers to Spotswood who says Buchanan is of opinion that before Palladius his coming there was no Bishop in this Church what warrant he had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Joannes Major saith speaking of the same Palladius The Scots he says were instructed in the Christian Faith by Priests and Monks without any Bishops But from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other form of Government will not stand with any reason For be it as they speak that by the Travels of fome pious Monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by Monks seeing long after these times it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with matters of the Church nor were they reckon'd among the Clergy But it 's strange how he can alledge Buchanan to be supported by no Authors except Major for Palladius his being Scotland's first Bishop he could not but know that not only Major but also Fordun Bede with many others within the Isle Prosper Bergumensis and among the later Historians the Magdeburgenses Baron with many other Transmarines assert it And this last affirms that none can deny it § 4. It 's true Spotswood says that Boeth out of ancient Annals reports that these Priests were wont for their better Government to elect some one of their number by common suffrage to be Chief and Principal among them without whose knowledge and consent nothing was done in any matter of importance and that the person so elected was called Scotorum Episcopus a Scots Bishop or a Bishop of Scotland But they reap little advantage here for in Boeth's words y there is no mention as the Bishop without book affirms whether these Annals were ancient or modern But whatever they be Hector gives ground to believe that he had Annals declaring the contrary as appears by his words above cited where he homologated that common sentiment of Christians and told us that Palladius was our first Bishop and that none before him had any Hierarchical Power in Scotland To alledge therefore Boethius as espousing their cause here is ony to set him at variance with all Christians and by the ears with himself But grant it were as Spotswood says yet there should no small dammage accreu to their Cause seeing on supposition hereof it follows that the Episcopal Ordination was altogether wanting in the primitive Church of Scotland it not being supposeable that this one man could Ordain all the Pastors in Scotland yea that even this their great Bishop had no other Ordination himself but what he receiv'd from Presbyters § 5. The Bishop's following words from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith c. are altogether void of reason For it 's granted that after the coming of Palladius which is the time whereunto he must refer the gathering of the Church she then indeed began to have another Government and never man yet pleaded that because the Church of Scotland was not govern'd by Bishops before Palladius therefore 't was not really govern'd by them after his coming which is the Inference the Bishop's words seem to deny But I believe there is more in them for they are abstruse and judge their meaning to be that tho' we had no Bishops before Palladius yet this can be no ground to conclude that we ought to have none afterward our Church being then rude and in her infant state The Advocat is of the same mind saying that before Palladius his time our Church was constituenda or unsettl'd But who can believe it For first it 's generally suppos'd that Palladius came to free this Church from Pelagianism and not to establish Church-government Secondly Is 't credible that the Church of Scotland after so long a continuation and flourishing of Christianity had been rather than any other Churches without any certain form of Government This is certainly a thing unparalellable even according to our Adversaries who tell us that every Church very soon after its beginning had its Diocesan Bishops and so a certain form of Government Thirdly Yea altho' many other Churches had been without all Government for such a tract of time there is ground to believe that Scotland could not they lying most of this time under the persecuting Sword whereas we read of no persecution in our Church even while our Kings were Pagan and our King Donald the I the first crown'd Head in the World that ever subject'd it self to Jesus Christ very much encourag'd the Christians and was seconded herein by severals of his Successors And altho' some of 'em were vitious and their Reigns short or vex'd with Wars yet such trouble never struck directly against Christianity like the fury of the Pagans throngh the rest of the World and others were both excellent Men and had longer and peaceable Reigns as Findochus and Cratilinthus but especially Fincormachus an excellent man and a great promoter of Religion and therefore as is most presumable was a great Instrument under God for the settlement of our Church-affairs Add to all this Fourthly That the terrible Storm of Persecution through the Roman World drove then from the Brittons
and other places no small number of excellent Men to Scotland who doubtless did no small service to God therein and especially in the time of Fincormachus when as all observe a great many fled hither who were famous both for Life and Doctrine yea long before this even in the time of Tertullian our Church was well known to much of the Christian World as appears from his clear Testimony The places of Britain saith he to which the Romans could not yet pass are notwithstanding subject to Christ. And if any have called Scotland barbarous or not well reform'd before the coming of Palladius Sir George learn'dly refutes them and names severals and among them even Stannihurst otherways an enemy to our Nation who have done it and he well observes that the reason why some speak of us as then not well enough reform'd was because of our want of agreement with the Church of Rome § 6. As to the last part of the Bishop's discourse saying that it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with the matters of the Church c. And wherein he is seconded by St. Asaph who falls foul on Presbyterians on this account as if they were darkners of all Church History c. They should know that as our Historians call'd these Monks they also call'd them Priests sometimes Presbyters or Bishops or Doctors and frequently Culdees Our people saith Boeth also began most seriously at that time to embrace the Doctrine of Christ by the guidance and exhortation of some Monks who because they were most diligent in Preaching and frequent in Prayer were call'd by the Inhabitants Worshippers of God which name took such deep root with the common People that all the Priests even to our time were commonly without difference call'd Culdees i. e. Worshippers of God Elsewhere this Author call'd these Teachers and Guides indifferently Priests Monks and Culdees Thus also speaks the best of our Historians some of whom we have heard calling them Presbyters and Admistrators of the Sacraments Hence 't is clear that when they call them Monks the word is not to be taken in the later Popish sense for a Layhermite for these our primitive Pastors were only call'd Monks by reason of their strictness of life and frequent retirement to Devotion when the publick work of the Ministry did permit it and perhaps also divers of them abstain'd from Marriage that they might keep themselves free from the World and its care without urging this on others as was the practice of the famous Paphnutius in the council of Nice From all which I conclude that before the coming of Palladius we had a settl'd Church without the least umbrage of their Hierarchy § 7. I add that long after that it had but very slender footing here seeing according to Spotswood they had no distinct Titles or Dioceses whose words are neither had our Bishops auy other Title then that of Scotorum Episcopi or Scotish Bishops whereby they were distinguish'd before the days of Malcomb the III who first divided the Country into Dioceses appointing to every Bishop the limits c. Yea after most strict search for a long time posterior to Palladius he can scarce find the least footsteps of Episcopacy And again long it was after the distinction of Dioceses before they were admitted to any civil Places or Votes in Parliament Hence nothing is more certain than that for many Ages the Church of Scotland knew nothing of their Hierarchy the first Rudiments whereof were bronght from Rome which was sent packing thither again when we renounc'd our obedience to Anti-christ § 8. Take but one other particular and I take leave of the Advocat he 's much displeas'd with St. Asâ—ph terming him a Caresser of Fanaticks for affirming that in consequence of this our Argument taken from the confess'd Practice of our primitive Church we might reasonably conclude that when we covenanted against Episcopacy we had only us'd our own right and thrown out that which was a confess'd Innovation in order to the restoring of that which was our primitive Government A notable and never to be forgotten Concession of so learn'd an Adversary as is this Bishop Let 's hear what the Advocat returns him It will not follow saith he that because our Church in its infancy and necessity was without Bishops for some years therefore it was reasonable for Subjects to enter into a solemn League and Covenant without and against the Consent ef their Monarch and to extirpat Episcopacy settl'd then by Law and by an Old Prescription of 1200 years at least But this most unfair Representation of our Arguments antecedent is I trust now sufficiently discover'd wherefore I have nothing to do here with it not yet am oblig'd to evince the consequence he denies seeing 't is not to be accounted ours but his own who made the antecedent Of the Grounds why the Nation entred into a Covenant I also discours'd already In the mean while I can't but take notice of his settling Episcopacy by Prescription a Romish Argument which whatever it may do in Law has no place here His Prescription I 'm sure essentially differs from that of Tertullian against the Heresies of his time seeing he liv'd in a very early Age when especially if ever Prescription could have place in the Church and the Doctrines which he defended were generally and uninterruptedly held by the Pastors even from the Apostles times and more ancient than the Heresies against which he prescribes whereas in the present case all things are clean contrary For as the Advocat himself here supposes the original of Scotish Episcopacy is several Ages posterior to that of the Apostles so that if the Argument could militat for either Party it serv'd well the Church of Scotland against Prelacy and not at all e contra But tho' things had been quite otherwise there had been no fear of harm from their Prescriptions seeing as Vincentius Lerinensis admonishes In refutation of inveterat Errors we must recurr to the sole authority of the Scriptures And Optatus Milevit plainly asserts that Christ's Testament abundantly suffices to determine all and every particular Controversie among Christians Thus we see how pleasant a spectacle these two Champions afford us the Bishop forms the Major Proposition and asserts on supposition of the Antiquity of our Royal Line and veracity of our Historians that our Church acted with reason enough and was only recovering her own Right when she cashier'd Prelacy The Advocat in attempting to disprove this the Bishop's Proposition has only giv'n such prevarications and elusions as most strongly confirm all the dis-interested of the truth thereof As for the Minor Proposition that our ancient Royal Line is not forg'd but real and our historical Monuments most true and credible the Advocat himself to the conviction of all the unbyass'd in both his Books makes appear It remains therefore as a conclusion of undoubted verity that our Church was
most learn'd of the Episcopal Perswasion acknowledg'd the truth of our Assertion on supposition that any credit is to be given to our Historians with whom also joins the learn'd Dr Stillingfleet So saith he if we may believe the great Antiquaries of the Church of Scotland that Church was governed by their Culdei as they called their Presbyters without any Bishop over them for a long time He gives also instances of other ancient Churches without Diocesan Bishops § 13. It had been more manly therefore and honest for D. M. to have at least attempted a refutation of Dr. Stillingfleet than to have dar'd his Adversaries to bring but one example of Churches without Diocesan Bishops seeing he knew there were store already giv'n even by Episcopals no less than Presbyterians which hitherto stand unanswered Let them also chaw their cude on that famous and well known Distinction of a first and second primitive Church acknowledged by Semeca and others even Popish Divines notic'd by Vsher and embrac'd by Stillingfleet in the former whereof Diocesan Episcopacy was not yet come in fashion nor was any such thing as a Difference either in Name or Office between Bishops and Priests or preaching Presbyters then in Being From all which judge with what brow D. M compares the account of our ancient Church-government to a supposed Fiction of the King of China and his Presbyterian Lady And by this dealling of D. M. I am put in mind of another piece of his Art who averres that all brought by Salmasius and Blondel to prove that Hierome was for the Scriptural and Apostolick Identity of of Bishop Presbyter and whatsoever is said by them for Presbytry is refuted by D. Pearson in his Vindicâ—ae Ignatianae I must not saith D. M. transcribe the acurat and unanswerable Dissertations of several learned Men who have sufficiently exposed the Writings of Blondel and Salmasius on this head particularly the incomparable Bishop of Chester vind St. Ignat. But no where did ever Dr. Pearson ingage with these Authors on this subject nor does he any such thing only he has some few excursions which touch not the marrow of the Controversie and therefore is nothing to D. M's purpose whether the advantage be yeelded to Salmasius and Blondel or to Dr. Pearson He abuses also some passages of Hierome to prove him self-repugnant but all such depravations had been by Iunius and others against the Papists and by Stillingfleet in his Irenicum clearly discover'd the places unanswerably vindicated even before he wrote his Vindiciae which their vindications of Hierome as also many other defences of the same Author brought by Salmasius and Blondel he scarce once adventures to handle But he has vindicated Ignatius they will say and this is enough But suppose that he had as really evinced these Epistles to be the genuine Work of Ignatius as he 's groundlesly pretended to have don 't yet so far is their inference from being good that as we shall hear the quite contrary follows viz. that in the Ignatian age Bishops were all one with the Pastors of single Congregations Hence it appears that this was one of D. M's pious Frauds to skarr his vulgar Reader for others he could not hope to catch thereby from the New Doctrine of Presbytry Section VIII Prelacy opposite to the Principles of our Reformers I Said when we renounc'd our Obedience to Anti-christ we sent amongst the rest of the Romish leaven Prelacy packing thither which tho' we had no more Arguments our Confession of Faith compil'd by our Reformers clearly evinces We detest say they Antichrist's worldly Monarchy with his wicked Hierarchy Of which Hierarchy as is acknowledg'd by the Council of Trent Bellarmine the Bishops make a principal part And the Episcopal Office with its distinction belong solely to their Hierarchy otherwise they confess there 's no Difference between Bishop and Presbyter At them therefore these words of the Confession must especially level And his subtility who would save the Prelats from this blow by seeking the foundation of a distinction where 't is not as if by the word Wicked the Confession pointed at another Hierarchy which is Pious must be reckon'd by all the disinterested to nigh of kin to his pericranium who to save another part of Romanism made a fair distinction between Lawfull and Vnlawfull Idolatry I say it can be no otherwise here for to speak truth their Hierarchy is nothing save the Corruption of Church-government and pride of her Governours rais'd by certain stories and tending towards the Papacy as its highest pinacle whereof both name and notion owe their Original to one who indeed was not the Father of lies yet in lying came so near him as readily any copy to its Original I mean the false Areopagite whose whole Book may really be term'd a fardel of Fictions Moreover this Confession was compil'd in the year 1581. when Prelacy had been unanimously by the whole Assembly in the preceeding year cast out of the Church And for many succeeding Assemblies their Declaration of their dislike and hatred of Prelacy and approbation of this Confession went hand in hand with whom then in both of these the King's Majesty join'd For the Assembly at Glasgow 1581. consisting for the most part of such as voted and were present in the Assembly at Dundie in the preceeding year when Prelacy had in terminis been renounc'd and ejected declares that they meaned wholly to condemn the whole estate of Bishops as they are now in Scotland and that this was the meaning of the Assembly at that time The King's Commissioner presented to this Assembly the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before together with a plot of the Presbytries to be erected which is registrat in the Books of the Assembly with a Letter to be directed from his Majesty to the Noble-men and Gentle-men of the Country for the erection of the Presbytries consisting of Pastors and Elders and dissolution of Prelacies and with an offer to set forward the Policy untill 't were establish'd by Parliament The King's Letter subscribed by his hand to the Noble-men and Gentle-men was read in open audience of the whole Assembly This Assembly ordain'd also that the Confession of Faith be subscribed as being true Christian and faithfull And in the Assembly 1595. amongst other things of the same tendency it was cleared that Episcopacy was condemn'd in these words of the Confession His Wicked Hierarchy See store of irrefragable proofs of this our Assertion in the Acts of the Assembly at Glasgow 1638. Sess. 16. § 2. They only bewray their ignorance if not worse while they give out that our Church in her first Reformation had Bishops as the word is now taken under the name of Superintendents For tho' this were true all they shall gain hereby would only be the fastening of a self-contradiction on Mr. Knox and the rest of these most honourable Instruments
temporary Bishops Paroch-ministers by the first Book of Discipline head 8 were deposeable by the Superintendent and the Elders of their Parishes The Superintendent was to be Judged by the Ministers and Elders of the whole Province But the fraud is palpable the words of the Book of Discipline are that if a Minister be worthy of Deposition the Elders of his Parish may with consent of the Kirk and Superintendent depose him Where you see the Kirk or Minister and Elders of the Province are no less interested in the Deposition of a Minister than in the judging of a Superintendent He suppress'd therefore all mention of the Kirk which even Spotswood whom he cites expresses to the end he might make his Reader believe no Minister save the Superintendent only had any power in Deposition of Ministers But privat Ministers saith he were to be admitted by their Superintendents but the Superintendents by the Superintendents next adjacent and the Superintendents had the Power of Ordination The first Book of Discipline and several Acts of the Assemblies But had only the Superintendents the Power of Ordination yea not only was there no plurality of Superintendents present at the Action but also John Knox who was no Superintendent ordain'd or admitted Spotswood Superintendent of L. yea every particular Minister when commissionated by the Assembly had no less Power of Ordination or any other thing whatsoever than is either in the Book of Discipline or any where else giv'n to the Superintendent Neither might any one particular Minister while he was a Commissioner more than the Superintendent be translated from one district to another without the Counsel of the whole Church or Assembly neither were there meaner Qualifications requisite in any Commissioner And I think Knox who was never a Superintendent was in these not inferiour to any of ' em But he had a living five times so much as another Minister But then I 'm sure he had five times as much to do with it being perpetually to Travell Preach and Exhort far and wide c but if this Rule had been keep'd our Bishops had got five times less than any other Minister for rarely did they any such Duty either at home or abroad In the mean while The Power of Riches and the baseness of Poverty maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower But Superintendents saith he were constant Members of General Assemblies had Power to Visit and to try the like c. of the Ministers of all the Churches of the Diocess and were to try those who stood Candidates for the Ministry had Power of granting Collations on Presentations But whatsoever he had of these belong'd also to every particular Pastor when commissionated by the General Assembly but tho' the Superintendent or Commissioner is only nam'd in such Cases as in trial of the Candidats granting Collations Deposition of Ministers c. He is to be understood as the Moderator and mouth of the Synod where he Superintended for Example the Assembly in the case of transportation chargeth the Ministers to obey the Voice and Commandment of their Superintendent and yet by the very same Act none can be translated without the Consent of the most part of the Elders and Ministers of Kirks conveen'd in the Synodal Assembly and yet from this very Act he adventnres to conclude the Canonical Obedience of Pastors to their Superintendents But he had Power to nominal Ministers to be Members of the General Assembly For Assembly 1562. 't was ordain'd that no Minister leave his Flock for coming to the Assembly except he have Complaints to make or be complain'd off or at least be warn'd thereto by the Superintendent And the L. Glamis in a Letter to Mr. Beza saith that after the Reformation it fell out by custom that the Bishops and so many of the Ministers Pastors and Elders as the Bishops appointed came to the General Assembly But touching what he alledges as said by the L. Glamis I can find it no where save in the Works of Saravia and Beza's Answer to Glamis his second Question wherein these words are found neither meets with nor presupposes any such Clause But be it that L. Glamis said so what will they hence infer he says indeed that this came to pass after the Reformation but how long 't was after the Reformation before this was practis'd he says not ' T was saith he receiv'd by Custom by no Decree of the Church then or Acts of the Assembly And lastly he speaks of Bishops not of Superintendents And I never find that any about these times gave Superintendents the name of Bishops and so this makes nothing for our Author's purpose Wherefore if ever L. Glamis had any such Expression whereof I much doubt in my mind he mean'd it of the Tulchans who for some space after the Leith-convention made some steps toward such a Superiority otherwise all the accounts we have of these times and in special the Acts of our Assemblies demonstrat that there was no such Power or Priviledge giv'n to any then in Scotland yea so much our Author himself presently proves and overturns this his own Argument by citing another out of the Assembly July 1563 1568 he should have said viz. Anent the Order hereafter to be used in General Assemblies They all voted and concluded as followeth viz. that if the Order already received pleases not by reason of the plurality of Voices it be reformed in this manner First that none have place to Vote except Superintendents Commissioners appointed for visiting the Kirks and Ministers brought with them presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge with the aforenamed shall be joined Commissioners of Burghs and Shires together with Commissioners of Vniversities Secondly Ministers and Commissioners shall be Chosen at the Synodal-convention of the Diocess by the Consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal-convention c. From this Act 't is clear that the former in 1562. has only been mention'd never concluded or at least cass'd and repeal'd by some intervenient Assembly otherways there had been no place or ground for the Act of 1568. which presupposes that ev'n these that were not at all thus Chosen at the Synod were free to come and Vote at the Assembly So far was this liberty from being put in the Superintendent or Commissioner's Power And indeed from this Act 't is most evident and 't is left on Record also by the Vindicatour of Philadelphus that before the time of this Act all Ministers who pleased were free to Vote at the Assemblies yet with our Author Petrie must be a mixer of lies for saying so much But Calderwood saith our Author leaves out intirely these words brought with them i. e. with the Superintendents and Commissioners of Kirks presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge whereby the Power of Superintendents and Commissioners for visiting of
all the esteem their alone § 2. Doctor Field tells us That these were not Lay-Elders Neither as they themselves well know do we so term them but did as the Ancients reckon them among the Ecclesiasticks And we assert that these very Lay-Elders as he calls them are understood by Hilary For first this Practice of the Christian Church is by Hilary deduced from the Synagogue wherein there were Elders distinct from the Doctors or Pastors Secondly He attributes to the Elders as their Office only the Power of Consulting and Deciding as being Assessors to the Doctors in the management of Church-Affairs without intimating ought of their Power to dispense the Word and Sacraments Thirdly He expresly distinguishes them from all Doctors or Teachers of the Church and therefore excludes them from all Power of Preaching or Administration of the Sacraments But Doctor Field saith that Ambrose by the name of Teachers whose sloth and pride he condemneth in this place might fitly understand the Bishop seeing none but Bishops have Power to preach in their own Right and others but only by Permission from them But this Answer supposes that the time was when Bishop Teacher and Doctor were reciprocal Terms and that whoever had the Charge of never so small a Flock was the Bishop thereof for who can believe that ever any receiv'd the Charge of a Flock to whom he was only to preach and dispense the Sacraments as a Journey-man to another Lastly When Hilary speaks in the preterit Tense that the Church had such tells that their Office consisted in being Assessors to the Teachers and says that the use of these was laid aside he clearly intimats that the Elders he speaks of were well nigh abolished and then scarce in Being Which by no means can be said of the preaching Presbyters For let Bishops be not only as proud as Dr. Field would have them but even as Lucifer himself yet most certain it is that long after Hilarie's time the Bishops in all weighty Affairs used at least to consult the Presbyters and that both then and still afterward preaching Presbyters were existent But herein I will not inlarge See their Glosses of both Scriptures Fathers whereby we vouch this Matter removed to name no others by Didoclavius to which I find nothing replyed This clear Proof that there were in the primitive Church other Elders distinct from those preaching Presbyters who in the time of the Apostles not much distant from that of Ignatius were dignifi'd with the name of Bishop furnisheth us with an Answer sufficient alone to solve whatsoever they can deduce from these Epistles Their only Argument is that Ignatius distinguishes between Bishop and Presbyter why then by Bishop may we not understand a Pastor of one Congregation and under the name of Presbyter a Ruling Elder They can only repone that Ignatius mentions but one Bishop of any City he wrote to which yet required more than one Pastor But one Man may be called the Bishop or Pastor of such a place altho' he be placed in a Colledge where a Plurality equally participats of the pastoral Charge and Honour and that this Answer may please them the better I shall give them Ignatius for my Patron herein who writing to the Romans expresly termeth himself Bishop of Syria to whose Charge even our Adversaries being Judges Antioch only one City thereof was committed 'T is moreover certain and granted by our Adversaries that there was even in one City frequently a Plurality of Bishops But tho' 't were yeelded that neither Scripture nor Antiquity favour these Ruling Elders and therefore that these Ignatian Presbyters must be something else we are yet where we were § 3. Our inquiry is after a Diocesan Bishop we 're sent to Ignatius to find him but all after the strickest search we meet with is only a Bishop or Pastor of one single Congregation as these ensuing Places proclaim Let none saith he do any of these things that ought to be practised in the Church without the Bishop let that Worship be counted Lawfull that is performed by him or which he at least has permitted wheresoever the Bishop is there let also the Multitude be present even as where Christ is there is also the Church it is not lawfull either to Baptize or Celebrate the Lord's Supper without the Bishop but whatsoever he alloweth that is acceptahle to God that whatsoever is done may be established From which Passage it 's evident that Ignatius supposes and allowes one of these Bishops to each particular Flock or Congregation without whose Presence the Word and Sacraments were not to be dispensed and altho' he adds that in some Case his Allowance or Approbation did warrant the practising thereof yet I 'm sure none can Infer any thing therefrom except that at some rare times when the Bishop happen'd to be absent from his particular Flock which uses to fall out to every particular Pastor another approved by him might untill his return to his Congregation discharge his Office And again Let there be saith he frequent Gatherings of your selves together or Congregations Inquire thou speaking to Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna or seek after every Man by his Name neglect neither servants nor hand-maids From whence it 's clear that this Ignatian Bâ—shop was particularly to be acquainted with and have particular Inspection of every one who was under his Charge which I'm sure cannot be easily performed by a Diocesan Bishop but is proper only to a Pastor of a particular Congregation or who can forbear to conclude as much from another Passage of the same Author where he saith Whosoever is not within the Altar is deprived of the Bread of God for if the Prayers of one or two have so much efficacy of how much weight must these be that are put up by the Bishop and the whole Church Sure I am the genius and ayr of this Passage proclaims Ignatius speaking of such a Bishop or Pastor as is under a Tye reciprocal between him and one particular Flock or Congregation And again In obedience to the Bishop break-Bread which is the Medicine of Immortality Neither is he a greater Friend to Diocesan Prelacy while he admonisheth the Church of Philadelphia in these words Children of the Light and of the Truth fly Divisions and Corrupt Doctrines and wherever the Pastor viz. the Bishop is thither you as Sheep follow him And again One Flesh of our Lord Iesus Christ and one Cup in the Vnion of his Blood one Altar and one Bishop Add to all this that Ignatius every where in these Epistles speaks to and of the Bishop as a correlative of and with respect unto the People or Flock and not Presbyters or inferiour Pastors as the proper Object of his Episcopal Office Seeing then all the Pastors of any Church he writes to might equally be term'd Bishop or Pastor of such a place seeing whatsoever he saith to or of Bishops hath
Scripture which otherways is one of the most refreshing Cordials to the weary and fainting Labourers of Christ's Vineyard And if we consult the Epistles to these Churches how many things shall we find therein that argue beyond scruple that the Spirit is speaking to the collective Bodies of Church-Officers and not to one Man only Shall we believe that for the sin of one Diocesan Bishop who as such was scarce so much as a Preacher of the Gospel all the Candlesticks of the Gospel were to be removed from the whole Church and the Light thereof extinguished a grievous Punishment and too universal providing the Diocesan only were to be charged with Defection Yea have we not much better reason to judge that this declining and deserting of their first Love imputed to the Ephesian Angel had crept into at least the far greater part of the Church-Officers and so the sin charged upon them and the punishment threatned shall have a far greater correspondency Moreover the trial of false Teachers for which the same Ephesian Angel is commended is not the Work of any one Church-Officer but of the Ecclesiastical Senat which therefore must be the Angel who upon this account is here commended D. M. yeelds that the Heavenly Admonitions first address'd to these Angels were also communicated to the Churches but by the interposal of their Angels But were this as certain as from what is now said it appear◠precarious yea and uncredible yet this Angel or Bishop might be only a Praeses or Moderator so his Argument is not at all relieved Who continues he cann't be call'd a Colledge of Angels but one single Angel c. Which is a most flat begging of the Question And tho' saith he there be Instructions in these Epistles in which besides others the Angels are particularly admonished yet they are no less adress'd to single Angels than the Epistle to the Philippians is to that Church Tho' St. Paul uses particular Compellations Ch. 4. verse 2. 3. Where he perverts the state of the Question which is not If in any Epistle there may be Instructions that concern some beside these to whom they are chiefly directed But if what is here said to the Angel can agree to any one Man And beside what is instanced to what one Man in the World can that agree which is promised to the Philadelphian Angel viz. That the Hereticks were to come and Worship before his Feet Such a promise indeed is made to the Church Isai. 60. 14. but to one meer Man no where § 9 From all which 't is evident that by the Name of Angels not particular Men but at least the Ecclesiastick Senats are design'd which is not unfrequent in Scripture as Mal. 2. 7. where 't is said that the Priests lips should keep knowledge from whose mouth the Law was to be sought the reason of which is subjoin'd that he was the Messenger or Angel c. as the Seventy have it I know from the Passage Dr. Hammond on the Revelation attempts to conclude the quite contrary alledging that in this place the High-Priest only is to be understood but without any ground of his alledgiance this his Assertion further supposes that the High-Priest alone was the Cabine of Knowledge and the Peoples Teacher from whom the Law was to be learned quite contrary to 2 Chron. 17. 8 9. where we learn that amongst the rest of the Teachers sent through the Kingdom by Jehoshaphat were Elishamma and Jehoram Priests Moreover the 4 5 and 6. verses of the same second of Malachy where under the name of Levi in the singular Number all the Levites are undeniably to be understood and what 's said of Levi as of one Man is certainly mean'd of a Multitude evince that under the name of Priest in the following verse we must understand a Plurality § 10. But the 24. verse of the second Chapter Vnto you I say and to the rest of Thyatira puts this beyond Debate But Hammond excepts that in the Ancient Greek Mss. And particularly that at St. James 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is left out and the words read To you the rest or To the rest of you in Thyatira But be it so yet I think these will not serve to discredit the Vulgar and universally received Greek Copy in which this particle is found Yea 't is found in so many Greek Copies and these of so good Note that I doubt if any of all these who during eight or nine Score of years translated or expounded this Place has ommitted it and altho' some Copies of the Vulgar Latine want it yet there be no few that retain it and amongst other two Mss. in the Library of Glasgow And Aretas or rather Andreas who lived in the fifth Century above as I believe the age of most of the Mss. now in the World I except not that at St. James's notwithstanding of what is fabled to the contrary retains this Particle as a part of the then uncontroverted Copy And after him Beda to which we may yet add the ablest of the Romanists as Dionysius Carthusians Lyra the Glossa interlinearis and a Lapide no Friends to Presbytry § 11. But D. M. tells us that these words in the 24 v. But unto you I say c. cannot be applyed so properly to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira as to these mention'd in the end of the 23 verse the other Churches of Asia Which saith he because they are mentioned in the Speech directed to the Angel of the Church of Thyatria the immediat transition from him to them is easie But except we force the place nothing of this kind can be thence collected there being nothing in this Epistle spoken to or of the other Churches except the meer mentioning thereof the more to hold forth the greatness and conspicuousness of the Punishment denunced against the Strayers in Thyatira Yea the latter part of the 24 verse And to the rest in Thyatira proclaims that the former part of the verse is to be understood of the same People of Thyatira likewise In a word his gloss is so uncouth and strain'd that you cannot easily tell what to make of it And 't is at least no more odd than his Conduct all along § 12. And to instance in the present Theme he would fain ridicule Salmasius for affirming that under the names of the Angels the Churches themselves or the more pure and Angel-like parts thereof are to be understood According to Salmasius his Iterpretation inferrs D. M. the seven Stars must needs be the seven Churches of the seven Churches As if such Phrases were not frequent enough in Authors and yet not justly lyable to any such Inference or as if the more holy and spiritual part of the Church were the whole visible Church for except D. M. so affirm the Author of this Gloss cann't be accus'd of nonsense who yet is not Salmasius for he only learn'd it from Aretas or Andraeas and other Fathers
fourth or the time of the fifth Century to prove a Metropolis in the first let any-one judge that doth but consider how common a thing it was to alter Metropoles especially after the new Disposition of the Roman Impire by Constantine Yea Carolus à sancto Paulo who was most versant in these Matters and with him Dr. Stillingfleet believe that for the first six Centuries Philippi was no Metropolis § 4. But I will not enlarge in overthrowing a Fancy so wild and gross But in the end of the second Century saith Dr. Burnet the Churches were framed in another mould from the Division of the Empire and the Bishops of the Cities did according to the several Divisions of the Empire associat in Synods with the chief Bishop of that Division or Province who was call'd the Metropolitan from the Dignity of the City where he was Bishop And hence sprang Provincial Synods and the Superiorities and Precedencies of Bishopricks You see how the chiefest of Prelatists disown and disclaim this Metropolitan Fiction but none more fully than Dr. Stillingfleet who has nervously baffl'd all their Pretences prevented whatsoever Dr. Maurice advanced for I speak not of Mr. Clerkson who has also sufficiently done it and finally more particularly ruined all their Pretexts for Philippi's Metropolitan-ship either in a Civil or Ecclesiastick sense during the first Century or Apostolick age Judge therefore of Dr. Maurice his Candor which minds me of another piece of his Legerdemain to evite the force of Philippians 1. 1. For if saith he in Mr. Clerkson ' s Opinion the Bishops mention'd Philip. 1. 1. be no other than Presbyters then this place is impertinently alledged since many Presbyters are by all sides acknowledg'd to have belong'd to one Church but if he speak of Bishops in the common Ecclesiastical sense and then conclude from this Passage that there were many in the Church of Philippi his Opinion is as singular as that of Dr. Hammond which he endeavours to refute for my part I must profess I am not concern'd in this Dispute and I could never find reason to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Or were these Bishops only Presbyters ruling the Church of Philippi with common and equal Authority Then our Author must give up the Question and in stead of making many Bishops must own that there was none at all there but Presbyters only if he thus contend he will abuse his Reader with the ambiguity of a word which he takes in one sense and the Church in another That many Presbyters might belong to one Congregation none ever deni'd that many Bishops in the allowed and Ecclesiastical sense of the word had the oversight of one City sounds strange and incredible to the ancient Christians Where he sleely supposes as granted that Bishops in Philip. 1. 1. must either be understood of their simple Presbyters or of Diocesan Bishops and then equipps his horn'd Argument no other ways than if he had professedly declined all Dispute till once his Adversary had out of kindness yeelded the Question which is only about the Scriptural and Apostolick sense of the word and notion of the Office of a Bishop if that and the Office of a preaching Presbyter be not in Scripture one and the same and consequently if these at Philippi were not Scriptural Bishops no less than they were Presbyters Now that he concern'd not himself in this Dispute nor was in earnest in it I deny not his slippery dealings make it but too too apparent his simple intimation that these were only their simple Presbyters I pass having already blown off all their noticeable Depravations of Philip. 1. 1. I have yet mett with and observe that he following the Romanists insinuats that we cann't understand the Scripture's meaning untill we have their Churches Commentary His ambiguous and unhandsome conduct is no less apparent in these his Phrases common Ecclesiastical sense which he takes in one sense and the Church in another For either he may mean that the Church when she speaks of Bishops who were in after times understands by this Name only Diocesans and so touches not in the least contrary to what he insinuats the Churches received sense of this Text nor what Notion she had of scriptural-Scriptural-Bishops Or his sense may be that when she speaks of Apostolick and Scriptural Bishops she then still means Diocesans and Rulers over their simple Presbyters and this he must mean if he speak to the Purpose And then I inquire what Church was of this mind Surely neither Primitive nor reformed Churches I except not that of England whose greatest Lights we have already heard disclaiming all Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy and identifying Bishop and Presbyter Yea many even of the Romanists are forc'd to confess so much There are Catholicks saith the Jesuite Justinianus who have stuck in the mud of Aërianism The Church then he means must be only a few factious Novelists who in despite of both Divine and Humane Records and the common Sentiment of Christians dare to obtrude on the World as a Fundamental of Religion their privat and wild Fancies Neither is it strange that so few imbrace this conceit of denying the Scripture-Identity of Bishop and Presbyter § 5. For beside these Scriptures now adduc'd let them but look unto 1 Tim. 1. 3. where they shall find a transition from Bishop to Deacons without any mention of intermediant Presbyters and consequently the Identity of these Offices Bellarmine Answers that the Apostle gives a general Instruction to the Clergy that under the name of Bishops Presbyters all the superior Clergy is comprehended But seeing they make a Distinction of these Offices so necessary it was requisite they had been handl'd in particular and not hudl'd up in a general seeing no where in Scripture there 's any more particular Distinction of Bishop and preaching Presbyter assigned but Bellarmine's main Answer to this and all such Scriptures is that the Names Bishop and Presbyter were then common to both Orders which Answer all the Hierarchicks and more particularly D. M. borrow from the Jesuite But I answer and argue with Junius against Bellarmine that seeing the Names were then common and a real community of Names imports a community of things which by these names are signifi'd it necessarily then follows that as the Names were then common so were the Offices design'd by these Names But to see the Reform'd conquering and the Jesuites foil'd some are much pain'd and in special D. M. who spends about 17 pages for the support of Bellarmine's Answer the substance whereof and of his first three Queries is that Still in the Pentateuch the High Priest is nam'd by the same Appellative without any distinction of Order or Jurisdiction that the other Priests were nam'd by and the title of a Priest was promiscuously apply'd without any distinction or marks of Eminence to the High Priest as well as to the Subordinat
the Menaces utter'd in the Old Testament against Tyre and her King had for their Object Parmenianus the schismatical Bishop of the Donatists who lived at Carthage that had once been a Tyrian Colony but in the time of Parmenianus was inhabited by Romans who had either quite extirpated or expelled thence the whole Race of the Tyrians With no less lightness but more danger did Justine Martyr long before Optatus endeavour to perswade the Gentiles that all Mankind were Partakers of Christ because they were Partakers of Reason and Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which also signifies Reason Where we see that Justine leans only on a pitifull Equivocation the deceit of which could not be unknown to him who natively spoke Greek Neither were Origenes Methodius and others as Hierome witnesseth more solide in their Writings Yea Hierome himself distinguisheth between Progymnasticks and Dogmaticks alledging that in the former of these a Disputant hath liberty to muster up many Arguments in which he hath no confidence § 4. To these we may add both their Homilies and Expositions wherein it 's not easily determined when they spoke their own minds or when they gave us only Transcripts of others to believe and defend which they held themselves but little obliged Yea Hierome oftner than once tells us that it was the common Practice of the Writers of these times to give the Expositions of others and yet conceal the names of the Authors and so involve the Reader and make him take for their judgement the things they never believ'd § 5. If we search into the causes of so strange dealing we have heard out of Hierome that one of 'em was meer sloath and neglect See much more to this purpose in Dallaeus de usu Patrum Another Cause why they both spoke wrote and practised otherways than they knew could be warranted by Scripture was their unjustifiable Compliance with both Jews and Pagans good perhaps intentionally being out of design the better to Proselyte them but eventually proved as unhappy as its Practice was unwarrantable and destitute of Scripture ground Hence their Deacons were named Levites their Bishops Priests and High-Priests the Lord's Table the Altar and the Lord's Supper a Sacrifice and at length Diocesan Bishops and Arch-Bishops were instituted in imitation of the Pagan Flamines and Protoflamines Another Cause thereof which especially takes place in their Homiles and Expositions was the multitude of Alterations and Corruptions well grown before any of these Homilies and Commentaries we now enjoy were extant these were too deeply rooted to be opposed and therefore they believed themselves under a kind of necessity to accommodat their Comments and Declamations thereto at least so to temper and compose them that they should not thwart therewith Of this sort of Conduct we have a clear instance in Augustine who sometimes commends and praises several unscriptural Ceremonies But elsewhere speaking his Mind more freely disapproves them as both unwrantable and burdensome He indeed there intimats that some things commonly observ'd throw the World tho' they were not written yet might be kept as having come from the Apostles or general Councils such as was the Observation of the Lord's Passion Resurrection and Ascension But even this as is most probable he yeelded out of humane Weakness and Fear to oppose the then prevailing Innovations for the needlesness of such preterscriptural Observations he evidently declares elsewhere saying that all things which belong either to Faith and Manners are plainly contain'd in Scripture From all which is clear that we cannot at all be sure if the Fathers Commenting on the places in hand either knew their true meaning or if they did sincerely gave us what themselves believed § 6. And that in their Explications of these Texts we have not their genuine Sentiments is to me evident First because they gave such Reasons of their Exposition as the greatest Prelatists count stark nought Thus Bellarmine rejects and overturns the Grounds of every one of these Expositors in particular except these of Chrysostome only who yet hath nothing of any moment above the rest for Chrysostome exponing Philip. 1. 1. alledges only in defence of his Exposition that the sole Title and Name of Bishop was common to both Orders but this is refused by Dr. Hammond and others and as we shall hear by Chrysostome himself But the Jesuite intending to retain that Exposition thought himself obliged to embrace some of their Defences whereas in truth they themselves never believ'd them to be solide but only the growing Corruptions being too strong to be opposed and some of 'em having got an Episcopacy which was then creeping in and which they depending on the Churches Authority thought they might retain they believ'd that for the fashion they might so gloss the Scriptures whereby Episcopacy is wounded that the People should not perceive the unwarrantableness thereof Secondly The main ground common to all these Expositions why they expone any of these Texts as if they condemn'd not a Diocesan Bishop is a sufficient evidence that they were far from being in earnest in their Glosses for they still alledge that there behoved to be a Bishop above these Bishops in Philippi whom Paul salutes because there might not be Plurality of Bishops in one City This Practice indeed was for the most part current in this time tho' not universal as we learn from Epiphanius informing us that even in these times there used to be a Plurality of Bishops in one City Yet quite contrary to this Text which they either carelesly or timourously shuffl'd They judged saith Dr. Stillingfleet the Practice of the Apostles by that of their own times as is evident by Theodoret and the rest of the Greek Commentators assigning that as the reason why the Presbyters spoken of in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus were not Bishops in the sense of their Age because their could be but one Bishop in a City And Petavius grants that many true Bishops were sometimes at once in one City And altho' the Episcopal Order be of Divine Right yet at 's not of Divine Right that there should be only one Bishop in one City this was only brought in by the Authority of the Church and Councils and accordingly Hierome and Ambrose are to be understood By what Law saith J. Taylor speaking of Philippi and that not as a Metropolis may there not be more Bishops than one in a proper sense in one Diocess Where 't is not unpleasant to hear so great a Prelatist by one Interrogation overthrowing the whole Episcopal Cause and propugning the main Plea of the Presbyterians viz. that in Philippi alone there were many who had not only the power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments but also of Ordination and Jurisdiction and were every way Bishops in a proper sense Thirdly Some of these Expositors proclaim what we alledge for OEcumenius who like the rest intimats as if
capable of another Translation Thus only in the Matter of Ordination they have got up or set themselves above them Secondlie Of the Power of Ordination it 's being proper to Bishops he speaks most doubtfully 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they seem c. saith he Thirdly Had he believ'd that the Power of Ordination by Divine Right belong'd to Bishops above Presbyters he had never said that there 's notwithstanding in a manner nothing between them surely Epiphanius thought the Power of Ordination made a most large and notable Difference Once again I shall with our Adversaries suppose that Chrysostome allows that Power of Ordination by Divine Appointment was appropriated to Bishops they cann't with reason deny but that in all other things to a hair he asserts the Equality yea the Identity of Presbyters with Bishops Now will they stand to Chrysostome herein Surely they will not for thus they should be oblig'd to let go all the Prerogatives and Priviledges Bishops both claim and exerce over their Pastors all their Power Paramount of Governing the Church and her Pastors all their exorbitant Wealth Grandeur Pomp and Splendor and in a word whatsoever renders to them the Hierarchie amiable or desireable and so should be really reduc'd to the condition of an ordinary Parish-pastor And were things so little I 'm sure would they care or stickel for upholding of any Distinction between these Officers hence let them blush any more to pretend to Chrysostome's Patrociny seeing all they can with the least colour plead for being giv'n not granted he really subverts their Cause and levells their Diocesan Prelat with a parochial Pastor § 4. Bellarmine Answers that Chrysostome and others while they say that onlie in Ordination a Bishop is above a Presbyter speak onlie of such things which no way agree to Presbyters for Iurisdiction and Confirmation may be performed by Presbyters by vertue of Commission from the Bishop But thus he really makes Chrysostome contradict himself Chrysostome said they differ'd nothing save in Ordination Bellarmine compells him to say that they have another Difference no less conspicuous than is between the King and his Commissioner who can do many regall Acts being warranted by him thereto Does such a Power lodg'd in the Bishop which agrees to none of the Presbyters make no Distinction between him and them Or rather does it not make up the far greater and more conspicuous part of the prelatical Eminency above the rest of the Clergy Add hereto Chrysostome's Books of the Priest-hood wherein altho' he expresly professes he was to treat of the Office of a Bishop yet in these Books there 's nothing but what concerns a congregational Pastor nothing but what concerns publick prayer dispensing of the Word and Sacraments and such Duties that terminat on the People alone but not a word of the Duties of the Bishop or Prelat over inferiour congregational Pastors as their Object which is a sure Demonstration that with Chrysostome Bishop Priest and Pastor were Synonymous Terms § 5. To these add Pelagius a grand Heretick indeed but never branded as such for ought he said of Church-Government who restricts all Church-Officers to Priest and Deacon And asserts that Priest without any Discrimination or Restriction are the Successors of the Apostles And Here saith he by Bishops we understand Presbyters for there could not have been more Bishops in one Citie but we have this Matter also in the Acts of the Apostles Where it 's clear that Pelagius altho' in conformity to the introduc'd Custome of distinguishing Bishops from preaching Presbyters he endeavour'd accordingly to expone this place with as little dammage thereto as is possible deduceth nothwithstanding the Ground of the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter from the Churches latter Custome of having but one Bishop in one City and not from any Scripture-Warrant and indeed when he brings to clear his Comment the 20. of the Acts 17. and 28. he plainly intimats that even when he and others of that Age seem most clearly to hold forth a Difference betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter they then believ'd no such thing to flow from Divine Institution And There is a Question saith he why the Apostle made no mention of Presbyters but comprehended them under the Name of Bishops because answers he this is the second yea in a manner the very same Degree with that of Bishops as the Apostle writes in the Epistle to the Philippians To the Bishops and Deacons when yet one City cann't have more Bishops than one and in the Acts of the Apostles Paul being to go to Hierusalem and having gathered the Elders of the Church saith among other things take heed to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops Hence it 's most evident that he believed both Offices to be by Scripture-Warrant one and the same and not a meer Communication of Names only But the thing most observable here is that to prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he brings Philip. 1. and hereby shews us that some of the Ancients from whose accustom'd Phrases he departed not while he exponed it when they seem to inferr from that place only a Community of Names did really believe no such thing but were perswaded that Philip. 1. 1. quite overthrows all Distinction betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter And Sedulius asserts and proves the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters and concludes from the Example of the Ephesian Elders or Bishops that there were many Bishops in one City contrary to the Practice of his Age and that among the Ancients Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same And Primasius proposeth the Question why the Apostle comes to the Deacons without any mention of the Presbyters And Answers in the very words of Pelagius Thus it 's clear even these whom the Hierarchicks take for the prime Pillars of Prelacy being Judges that there 's no Divine Warrant for Diocesan Episcopacy and that a Bishop and Presbyter in Scripture in Apostolick times are one and the same For saith Augustine with whom I begin tho' Younger than Hierome being longer to insist on the other tho' according to these Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now brought in fashion the Office of a Bishop be greater than that of a Presbyter yet in many things Augustine is below Hierome where we see that the whole Difference was in Expression rather than reality and that even that was only by Custome not by Divine Appointment These words hath now brought in fashion answers Bellarmine are not opposed to the ancient time of the Church but to the time before the Christian Church so that the sense is before the times of the Christian Church these Names Bishop and Presbyter were not Titles of Honour but of Office and Age but now they are Names of Honour and Dignity D. M. follows his Master Bellarmine in this wretch'd Detortion and adds that this was but a
proceed to Justine Martyr who thus gives an account of the state of the Churches their particular and weekly Assemblies for receiving the Word and Sacraments After this Bread and Wine tempered with Water is brought to the Ruler or Governour of the Brethren which when he hath received he gives praise and glory to the Parent of all The Deacons give to all present Bread and Wine tempered with Water after they are Consecrated by Thanks-giving and carry them to such as are absent And on Snnday all who live either in Cities or in the Country come together into one place And when the Reader has ceas'd the Governour makes an exhortatory Sermon The voluntary Contribution is laid up with the Governour who distributes it to the Orphans c. Where it 's not only observable that Justine following not the pretended Ignatius but the Apostle Clement Polycarp Hermas mentions only two Orders of Church-men viz. Governours and Deacons but also that he gives a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop to every Congregation and that Justine's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with the Bishop who was then in being is yealded by the fiercest Hierarchicks Heylen who yeelds his whole Plea and says that Justine's President of the Congregation or Bishop ordinarily celebrated the Eucharist and Preach'd God's holy Word and Maurice Well then 't is all one how this ancient Church-Ruler be named whither Presbyter Governour or Bishop seeing there was one for every Congregation that mett for receiving the word and Sacraments the Controversy between us and the Hierarchicks which is not about Names but Things is fully ended if they stand to Justine's Decision § 9. Dr. Maurice would have Justine to be understood as speaking only of the Diocesan Bishops Church For saith he to carry the Bread and Wine to all absents in their severall Duellings was not convenient nor easy in numerous Congregations and they knew not well who were absent But this Perversion is too wretch'd palpable to wheedle any in in his right wit out of Justine's plain Meaning Dr. Maurice knew well enough that in these times of such Fervor and Love among Christians and such Veneration for the Lord's Supper they doubtless most exactly observ'd the Ordinances and absented not without speciall and weighty Causes And seeing the Custome of receiving the Elements at home when they could not come to Church was then in vigour and believed to be their Duty if these Elements were given to Absents as their proper Communion or were only the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the last remains of the Custume of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Love Feasts I now dispute not they took special care to signifie their Absence and Causes thereof by their Relations or Christian Brethren to their Deacons and such as were concerned to know it Neither if we consider the Church-Discipline of these times is it to be doubted that the Deacons had an exact List of all to whom they were each Lords Day to give the Sacrament and consequently by no means could be ignorant who were either absent or present Wherefore tho' the Deacons had been fewer than they were they could easily tho' the whole Congregation had been never so numerous carry the Elements to these very few whom sickness or other lawfull and weighty Reasons had confined to their Habitations all which Dr. Maurice well enough perceived and therefore he 's here no less feeble in his Actings than a man breathing his last and advances only such triffles as may make his Friends ashamed and confirm his Adversaries Neither do I wonder hereat seeing he undertook the Defence of a palpable untruth for not only speaks Justine of the Christian Assemblies in common without the least exception but clearly tells us that he speaks of the meatings of all the Christians for receiving the Word and Sacraments not only in Cities but in the Country a place too base for the Cathedral and Diocesan Bishops Chair and of all such Congregations as in the first day of the Week as the Apostle speaks made Collections or had Deacons for that end which belongs to every Congregation where the Word and Sacraments are dispensed Neither is this ought but what we have discover'd to be the Mind of their Ignatius himself and seconded with the Suffrages of the greatest Friends to Prelacy § 10. Wherefore most vain is D. M's Labour to prove that it follows not from Justine that there were then only two Orders of Church-men Seeing Justine giving a Governour or Bishop to every Congregation quite overturns Diocesan Episcopacy And more vain yet is this that as what he undertakes tho' proved is nothing to his purpose so the Reasons he brings prove nothing of what he undertakes For his first Reason viz. That Justine intended only to give a true account of what was ordinarly performed in the Christian Meetings in opposition to the abominable Stories propagated against them by their Enemies so that he had no occasion to reckon up the several Gradations of the Hterarchy is equally favourable to Prelatists and Papists who may as well use it for a Sanctuary to their Pope as they to their Prelats And indeed had there then either been a Pope over all or a Prelate with Princely Power as D. M. pleads for over a multitude of Churches the Christians seeing they were frequently reproached with an intended Rebellion had found themselves obliged in a special manner to apologize for their Princes and absolute Lords who would have been looked on as little less than the Emperour's Rivalls and Arch-Promoters and Heads of the supposed Insurrection Moreover which we have already noted and fully shews the nullity of D. M's Reason not only Justine but all the genuine Writings of them that went before him mention only like Justine these two Orders of Church-men D. M's second Reason viz. That the Christians were most shy to publish any thing relating either to the Mysteries of their Religion or the Constitution of the Church more than was absolutely necessary in their own Defence c. is another lurking place for Romanists when urg'd to shew the Antiquity of their Innovations and indeed if it do any thing it tends to prove that no Party can make any Advantage of ought spoken or written by the Fathers and if so have att the Foundation of Diocesan Prelacy its prime Advocats acknowledging that no Argument for it can be draun from Scripture but only from the writings of the Fathers His third Reason is that as the Offices so the names of Bishop and Presbyter were not only known to be distinguished in his days among the Christians but he brings no genuine Writer of that Age to prove this and that it is most false is already evinced but even the Heathens knew so much and cites Adrian's Epistle to Servianus but it 's highly probable that the Emperour if we allow him any knowledge of these Affairs understands under the name of Presbyters
the very same Officers the very same Men that he means by the name Bishops rather than e contra see Pray the Letter it self apud Flav. Vopis in Saturnino § 11. 'T were easie to shew divers succeeding Fathers to have been of Justine's Mind and Strangers to Diocesan Episcopacy ignoring all Discrimination between Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor I shall only here with one Chamier against Bellarmine and the rest of the Jesuites assert against their Successors and Defenders under whatever Name they be known that according to Irenaeus the Churches were committed to the Presbyters no less than to the Bishops that these who are now reckoned Popes High-Priests universal Bishops are only Presbyters in the Judgement of Irenaeus and that in him Presbyters are not so much as once distinguished and far less separated from Bishops From what is said appears the vanity of D. M's Popish Query Whether all things duly considered a more evident and universal Tradition for the Superiority and Jurisdiction of a Bishop above a Presbyter can be reasonably demanded and whether the Argument from universal Tradition be not in this Case the most proper and most necessary And whether the Tradition for the Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter be not more universal unanimous and uncontradicted in the Primitive Ages than many other Traditions that are unquestionably received What these his other Traditions are we are not ignorant The Doctrine certainly of the morality of the Sabbath of Baptism and of the Holy Trinity and the like these they think lean only on Tradition and that the Institution of their Diocesan Prelats Metrapolitans and Arch-Prelats and other such Effects and Inventions of a degenerating and apostatizing Church are better founded than these most Scriptural Catholick and necessary Doctrines Section X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy AND now in the next place I would gladly learn how they will describe or whereon they can found their Romish or which is all one their Hierarchick Diocesan Bishop For as Augustine well observes it is a name of Labour and Travel not of Honour and Dignity and indeed it imports only Watchfullness Labour and Care as its most native and proper Signification and on this account only the King gets the name of Bishop in Hesychius as he gets the name of Pastor in Homer And Hesychius gives it no less to every Watchman Thus the word Bishop denotes a vigilant Watchman in Suidas where he tells us that some bearing this Name were sent by the Athenians to observe the Affairs of their subject Cities who were called Watchmen So is the same word understood to denote only Care and Labour by Jullius Pollux whereas on the other hand the word Presbyter when taken for a Function or Office natively imports Rule and Honour A Presbyter acknowledges even Saravia is a Name of Honour and was given to the more honourable and to the Magistrats among the Jews in the Old Testament and was thence transferred to signifie the Governours of the Churches of Christ in the New Testament but they are called Bishops from their watchfull Care which is a Name of Work and Labour The name Presbyter saith Dr. Stillingfleet as the Hebrew ZAKEN tho' it originally import Age yet by way of connotation it hath been looked on as a Name both of Dignity and Power among the Jews in the times of the Apostles it is most evident that the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imported not only Dignity but Power the Presbyters among the Jews having Power both of Judging and Teaching given them by their Semicha or Ordination Now under the Gospel the Apostles retaining the Name and the manner of Ordination but not conferring that judiciary Power by it which was in use among the Jews to shew the Difference between the Law and the Gospel it was requisite some other Name should be given to the Governours of the Church which should qualifie the importance of the word Presbyters to a sense proper to a Gospel state which was the Original of giving the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Governours of the Church under the Gospel a Name importing Duty more than Honour and not a title above Presbyter but rather used by way of Diminution and Qualification of the Power imply'd in the name of Presbyter c. The Hierarchicks therefore should act much more rationally if they turn'd the Tables and gave the name of Presbyter to their Diocesan and that of the Bishop to their inferiour Curats who usually do most of the Pastoral Work In the mean while it 's sure from what we just now learned out of these Authors that during sounder Antiquity before men equally abused Names and Things a Bishop could never be either ane Order or Degree or any thing else above a Prsbyter But from Names if we pass to things and look into Scripture and sounder Antiquity we shall find the ancient Bishop so different from the present Diocesan that the very Idea's and notions of the two are diametrically opposite one to another The Apostles themselves Acts 6. 2 4. following the Commandment of their Master found it their Duty so assiduously to labour in Preaching and Prayer that they thought it unreasonable to be diverted even by the Distribution of the Collections and Care of the Poor which otherwayes was a Work both lawfull and pious And to Timothy who if we believe the Hierarchicks was ane Arch-Bishop of a vast Diocess it 's injoyn'd as his proper Task to Preach the Word to be instant in season and out of season to reprove to rebuke exhort with all Long-suffering and Doctrine I need not here multiply Texts read and read over again the whole New Testament and you shall find that the Exercise of Prayer Dispensing the Word and Sacraments was the main Duty and perpetual Imployment of every Pastor or Minister of Christ. Look on the other hand to the bulk of the Hierarchick Lord-Bishops they haue a quite different Work and Exercice and if any of 'em happen to spend some time in the Ministerial Duties how are they commonly gaz'd on and depredicated as Men of extraordinary Condescension superlatively stuping to a piece of Service far below the Episcopal Grandeur and unusual to the Order Are they not then quite another thing than the Apostolick and Scripturall Bishops This Apostolick Example the Conscientious Primitive Bishops or Pastors clossly follow'd not so much as once dreaming that any who was ordain'd a Minister of the Gospell and intrusted with a Flock might on whatsoever pretext neglect to exercise himself perpetually in Prayer and Dispensing the Word and Sacraments This they judg'd his constant Imployment and this was the Practice of all the sincere Bishops even after the Distinction of Degrees was introduc'd as appears in the weekly and sometimes the dayly Homilies and Lectures of Chrysostome and Augustine which are yet extant And it 's already
as themselves acknowledge were subject to many considerable lapses and escapes 165 The causes thereof 167 Several reasons demonstrating that if ever the Fathers so glossed these texts as not to hurt Diocesan Episcopacy they then gave not their genuine sentiments 168 SECT VIII Moe clear testimonies of the Primitive Doctors against the Divine right of Diocesan Episcopacy produced and vindicated The testimony of Ambrose or Hilary Bellarmine's perversion discovered 171 Petavius's vain attempts both to exauctorate and deprave Hilary 173 The testimonie of Chrysostome 174 He 's vindicated from Bellarmine's depravation 175 The testimonies of Pelagius Sedulius and Primasius 176 Augustine vindicated against Bellarmine and his Plagiary D. M. 177 Apart of Jerome's testimony on the epistle to Titus vindicated against the dishâ—nest dealing of Bellarmne and D. M. 178 No ground to think that ever Jerome accounted James Bishop of Jerusalem 180 All Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments are in Jerome's account the Apostles Successors 181 The rest of Jerome's testimony on the Epistle to Titus vindicated 182 His testimony out of the Epistle to Enagrius vindicated against Bellarmine and D. M. 183 This doctrine of Jerome most catholick and universally received 188 SECT IX The testimenies of Ignatius his Contemporaries and Suppars disproving what our Adversaries would force him to speak and confirming what we have prov'd to be his mind viz. that he cashiers a Diocesan Prelacy Negative testimonies 190 Clemens Romanuâ—'s positive and clear testimonies 192 Petaviuâ—'s exceptions met with 194 As are these of his Underling D. M. 197 The testimony of Polycaâ—p where Dr. Pearson's strange evasion is routed and D M â— ill gronnded vaporing exploded 199 The testimonies of Hermas where the vanity of D. M. â— Romish Cavills is discovered and Blondel vindicated 200 The testimonie of Justine Martyr where Dr. Maurice's perversions are detected as is also the unreasonableness of D. M's reasons against Justine Martyr's plaine meaning 204 Irenaeus identifies Bishop and preaching Presbyter 206 D. M's Popish querie 207 SECT X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy A Bishop is a name of labour a Presbyter a name of honor Ibid The true notions of the Apostolick and Hierarchick Bishop diametrically opposite one to another 209 The example of the Apostolick Bishop followed and the Idea thereof retained by all the true primitive Bishops or Doctors which is all one with the notion of a laborious Pastor of a Congregation Ibid. This is confirmed out of the Council of Sardica and others of these times where Dr. Maurice and Dr. Beverige their sly and perverse dealing is discovered 2â—0 The subjecting of one Pastor or Church to another finally resolved into a Romish slavery 213 Every Disepnser of the Word and Sacraments is a true Bishop 214 That in the least Village and meanest Countrie-places where there was a Congregation there was a true Bishop largely evinced where Dr. Maurice his exceptions is obviated Ibid. All Bishops equal among themselves hence their Hierarchy is overthrown 216 Their Romish argument from the pretendedly uninterupted succession of Diocesan Bishops enervated 217 The argument drawn from the lists of Bishops in Rome and such great Cities satisfied First From the positions already demonstrated which are further confirmed Secondly From the confessed uncertainty of these lists Thirdly From this that in Rome there was at once a plurality of Peter's pretended successors Fourthly From this that Peter was never at Rome which is largely demonstrated Fifthly from the evident falsity of the lists of the Bishops of Jerusalem 218 That the government of the prime primitive Church was truly Presbyterian made out from a cloud of most unsuspected Authors 225 A prostasy gradually turned into a Papal Tyranny 230 The Ancients kept fast the Foundations of Christianity but strayed exceedingly in superstitious additions 231 The Hierarchicks embraceing diverse novell Enormities desert the Primitive Church where Heylen's preversion of the Ancients is discovered Matthew 20 25 c. vindicated and D. M's Romanism and Judaism detected 223 The Bishop of Aiace his Christian Discourse unchristianly eluded and slighted by the Trent-Hierarchicks 239 ERRATA pag. lin read 2 7 r. this 4 23 r. thereto is sufficient 7 1 r. palpably 8 10 r. Jac. 14 1 r. the feares of the. 26 33 dele comma 32 penult r 158. Ibid ibid r 163. Ibid. ult r 53. 37 25 dele y 59 10 dele as 69 21 r hope of their 80 25 r is injoyn'd 82 32 r life 84 1 r Act. 85 13 r their 87 ult r disaprov'd 92 15 r liked 104 33 r from 125 7 r leanes 129 6 r Apostles 137 13 r breaking on bread 140 30 r whereon 150 28 r Apostles 168 21 r expositures 175 24 r other Pastors 178 5 r in 184 12 dele that 185 18 r Apostolical 186 28 r were 188 27 adde it 197 26 dele it 202 18 r from 207 1 r our 214 6 r or Ibid. 7 r of 216 ult r are 217 20 adde acknowledged Ibid. 31 r them Ibid. pen. r de cornu 219 20. r breaks 223 1 Babylon and is called a Persian i. e. a Parthian City and the Metropolis 237 16 r allowable 239 28 r would ADDENDA pag. 71. lin 21. But saith Heylen Cosmographie pag. 332. beeing once settled in an orderly and constant Hierarchy they held the same untill the Reformation began by Knox when he his Associats approving the Genevian Plat-form took the advantage of the Minority of King James the sixt to introduce Presbyterian Discipline and suppress the Bishops pag. 96. lin 9. What was the mind of the Waldenses Hussites saith Voetius speaking of the Opposers of Prelacy Polit. Eccles. part 2. pag. 833. is evident from their most accurat History written by Joh. Paulus Perrinus which is not extant save in their vulgar Tongues Nazianzeni Querela et Votum Justum OR The Fundamentals of the HIERARCHY examined and disproved Part I. Which briefly handles the prime Arguments for the Hierarchy as also some of its Concomitants and Qualities Section I. The Scope of the ensuing Treatise THE purpose of our present Discourse is not directly to handle that much tossed Debate if an Office in the Church for species or kind superiour to that of dispensing the Word and Sacraments hath any footing or warrant in the Word of God Neither will this be judged necessary by any who call to mind that many Treatises disproving the divine right of Episcopacy as Altare Damascenum and Rectius Instruendum have had so good success that for ought I know they stand intirely without any shadow of an Answer Yea the most learned that ever pleaded for the Lawfulness of Episcopacy will not blame us though we yeeld no Scripture-ground to it but only consider it in it self as a thing indifferent of which mind among the Ancients were not only those who denyed not the exercise of his Office to be Lawfull as Hierome but also the very Bishops themselves as Augustine all of them founding this
than the rest assert that it is founded on the Example and Institution of Christ or his Apostles § 3. This Discourse therefore shall weigh the Advantages alledged to flow from Episcopacy that it may appear if it have such Effects as they Promise As also inquire if the Hurt and Dammage does not preponderat all the Good they can pretend to be linked to their Hierarchy Neither shall we neglect to examine if what the most Learned of that Perswasion bring from Ecclesiastick Antiquity be subservient to their Cause Section II. The Aphorism No Bishop No King discuss'd A Chief Argument whereby they would prove the necessity of Prelacy they bring from the great Support which they say it affords to Monarchy Hence with them No Bishop No King is an axiomatick Aphorism which cannot be readily granted seeing to name no more the charges the Hierarchy stood the King and Kingdom made a dear Bargain Much was spent in their stated Revenues but more by their clandestine Exactions and other sinistrous means of draining the Country and places of their pretended Jurisdictions throw which there are Incorporations that even at this day groan under the Debts they then contracted And yet more by sustaining Standing-forces to be Janizaries to the Prelates and their Complices and persecute the sincerer part of Protestants for else there was then no use of such numbers Yet their Maxime may be thus far granted that Prelacy may much contribute to the introduction of a Despotick and Arbitrary Government And indeed the great Power they usurped and manifold Influences they had over both Cities and Country either to wheedle or menace them to elect such Members of Parliament as pleased them and to Cajole or awe these Parliament-men to speak in their own Dialect And the being of a good number of them prime Lords of the Articles whereby they had either the mediat or immediat Flection of the rest made them well nigh able to effect no less Which kind of Government no Wise and Paternal Prince will desire § 2. Moreover that Princes have no great reason to be fond of them is apparent from their great unfitness to manage Politick and State-Affairs There are two Ways whereby one may be fitted for being a Statesman either when Natural induements are extraordinary which I doubt if many of our Prelats could affirm of themselves Or else that of Education and continued Industry whereby to be fitted for State-imployments but so far were they from any thing of this that during their greener years they had quite other Studies and Imployments being designed for the Ministry and so were obliged to prosecute hard the Study of Divinity which I am sure will give any Man his handsfull of Work who makes earnest of it From this they are taken to feed some Flock which at least will give them no less exercise Now how these Men can be fit for managing State-affairs or how they can be well kept from falling into Solecisms therein whose skill is so small is not very discernable But though they were never so well fore-armed for such high State-imployments how find they leisure to exercise them Is not the Ruling and Governing so many Ministers and Churches which they alledge themselves to be entrusted with a Work heavy enough to exercise if not to bruise any one Man Or where have they found Warrant to relinquish the Ministry and turn themselves to Offices of State when offered or to undertake both together Do they not believe that either of them is heavy enough Know they not that not only the Apostle but also the ancient Canons and to name no others these which though not truly are called the Canons of the Apostles most clearly condemn this their Practice Let neither say they a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken upon him any secular Business otherways let him be cast out off his Office Hence we may learn if it be out of Conscience that these Men plead for Antiquity when they palpable contemn and trample what themselves count the most venerable Precepts thereof Moreover it 's observable how they so far as their Interest led them still studied the ruine of those to whom they owed their Being as Bishops Thus the Roman Prelats studied the Ruine of both the Eastern and Western Emperours Thus the Bishops of Scotland brought no small Vexation to both King and Nobility in the Reign of Alexander the III. And so Becket of Canterâ—ury and his Faction handled Henry the II of England But worse did their Successours treat Richard the II whom in his Absence they deprived of his Kingdom It 's vain to repone that these were Papists seeing the ambition of Prelats is well enough known of whatever Name they be Yea such also have been the Practices of Prelats who acknowledged no Pope as divers of the Greek Patriarks who helped not a little to Dethrone their Emperour And the English Bishops as Sir Francis Knols complains in a Letter to Secretary Cicil encroached not a little upon the Priviledges of the Crown kept Courts in their own Name and still give out that the Complex of their Office i. e. the civil part of it as well as the other without any Distinction was not from the King but from Jesus Christ. Which Encroachments are really Imperium in Imperio On which account this their usurped Power as being dangerous and of a Romish Original was abolished in the first Parliament of Edward the VI. The Substance of what Dr. Sanderson either insinuats or more clearly expresseth in Answer hereto is that this was a Corruption in Edward 's Reformation And that some other Courts in England as well as these of the Bishops are not kept in the King's Name But sure it 's not very credible that this was a Corruption seeing nothing else since Edward's Days hath been done during the succeeding Reigns for that Church's further Reformation but 't is an odd Paradox if we consider the Author for it was Mary who Abolished this Act of Edward and restored their Power when she brought back the rest of Popery And though other Courts as he says be not kept in the King's Name yet reason teacheth and former experience proves how dangerous it was to give Ecclesiasticks ought that looks like an Absolute power and worldly Grandure whereby like the Pope they may by his Artifices arrive at length to a real Independency And indeed B. Laud made large steps towards it who as Roger Coke relates copt with the King himself and maugre both his Will and Authority must visit Colledges not as his Commissioner but by his own Metropolitan right and plumed thus saith the Author in his own Feathers all black and white without one borrowed from Caesar whereby the more he assumes to himself the less he leaves to the King he now soars higher And notable here is Dr. Sanderson's disingenuity who always gives out that the Marian Act which he still compares with yea prefers to that of Edward was
never repealed by any succeeding Parliament But we are informed by the same R. Coke d that by the 1. Tac. 25. the Marian Act was repealed and so that of Edward revived And now to see him who pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel whose Office is only Ministerial and spiritual exercised only in spiritual things without reaching Men's Bodies inflicting only Rebukes and such verbal punishments to see such I say keeping Courts altogether Civil and inflicting corporal mulcts and Punishments after the manner of Worldly Potentats but especially when all this is done in their own Name would really make the indifferent Beholder averre that such imitated to the Life his Romish Holiness and believed much better his Doctrine of his receiving both spiritual and temporal Sword than that of our Saviour whereby he prohited his Apostles and their Successours all such earthly Grandure and despotick Power as resembles the Lordship and Dominion of worldly Princes § 3. But their Maxime not only intimats that Prelacy well accordeth with Mouarchy but also that any other Form of Church-government is destructive thereof Which how they will evince I know not How they can shew that Presbytrie with which I am only here concerned is destructive of or in the least inconsistent with Monarchy I cannot perceive They can I am sure neither deduce their Inference from the Practice of Presbyterians nor the Principles of Presbytrie Not from the first for though they load them as if they had been the Cause of many Civil Broyls and Calamities and especially of these ensuing the Year 38. We may justly yea with the allowance of the Hierarchie's greatest Favourers reject the Charge and send it home to the Prelats who by their attempting to introduce into the Church a Mass of Romish Superstitions and their Pride and Tyranny exercised on all sorts were become unsupportable to both Nobility and People B. Laud Montegue and such Papaturients were then earnestly labouring the reintroduction of a Mass of Romish Leaven into England though there were but too much there already which had never been cast â—ut Take one Instance or two in the words of R. Coke a high Church-of-England-man and no Lover of Presbyterians I 'm sure The Bishops saith he of the Province of Canterbury in their own Names enjoin the removal of the Communion-table in the Paroch Churches Vniversities from the body of the Church or Chancel to the east of the Chancel cause Rails to be set about the Table and refuse to administer the Sacrament to such as shall not come up to the Rails receive it Kneeling that the book of Sports on Sundays be read in Churches and enjoin Adoration I do not find that Adoration was ever enjoined before nor any of the forenamed Injunctions in any Canon of the Church Our Bishops were of the same mettal with these Innovatours in England and their most docile Schollars Laud therefore and his Faction apprehending that we would make but a small resistance against them to whom England was likely to yeeld prepared for us all her Cup with some other additional Drugs more Romish than what was obtruded on the English Witness the Form in the Administration of the Sacrament which as R. Coke acknowledges was the same in the Mass. But seeing the knowledge of the state we were in when the Nation entred into a Covenant and opposed that Stream of Romish Abominations contributes not a little to repell their fierce charges of Rebellion and Sedition the Reader will pardon me though at some length I transcribe a Passage from one who is beyond suspicion of being partial in favours of Presbytrie Covenant or ought of that nature I mean Dr. Burnet The Bishops saith he therefore were cherished by him the King viz. with all imaginable expressions of kindness and confidence but they lost all their Esteem with the People and that upon divers Accounts The People of Scotland had drunk in a deep prejudice against every thing that savoured of Popery This the Bishops judged was too high and therefore took all means possible to lessen it both in Sermons and Discourses mollifying their Opinions and commending their Persons not without some reflections on the Reformers But this was so far from gaining their Design that it abated nothing of the Zeal was against Popery but very much hightned the rage against themselves as favouring it too much There were also subtile Questions started some Years before in Holland about Predestination and Grace and Arminius his Opinion as it was condemned in a Synod at Dort so was generally ill reported of in all reformed Churches and no-where worse than in Scotland but most of the Bishops and their Adherents undertook openly and zealously the Defence of these Tenets Likewise the Scotish Ministers and People had ever a great respect to the Lord's-day and generally the Morality of it is reckoned an Article of Faith among them but the Bishops not only undertook to beat down this Opinion but by their Practices expressed their neglect of that Day and after all this they declared themselves avowed Zealots for the Liturgy and Ceremonies of England which were held by the Zealous of Scotland all one with Popery Vpon these Accounts it was that they lost all their Esteem with the People Neither stood they in better Terms with the Nobility who at that time were as considerable as ever Scotland saw them and so proved both more sensible of Injuries and more capable of resenting them They were offended with them because they seemed to have more interest with the King than themselves had so that Favours were mainly distributed by their Recommendation they were also upon all Affairs nine of of them were Privy Counsellers divers of them were of the Exehequer Spotswood Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews was made Chancellour and Maxwell Bishop of Ross was fair for the Treasury and engaged in a high rivalry with the Earl of Traquair then Treasourer which tended not a little to help foreward their Ruine And besides this they began to pretend highly to the Titles and Impropriations and had gotten one Learnmonth a Minister presented Abbot of Lindoris and seemed confident to get that state of Abbots with all the Revenue and Power belonging to it again restored into the hands of Churchmen designing also that according to the first Institution of the Colledge of Justice the half of them should be Churchmen This could not but touch many of the Nobility in the quick who were too large sharers in the Patrimony of the Church not to be very seusible of it They were no less hatefull to the Ministry because of their Pride which was cried out upon as unsupportable Great Complaints were also generally made qf Simoniacal Pactions with their Servants which was imputed to the Masters as if it had been for their advantage at least by their allowance They also exacted a new Oath of Intrants besides what was in the Act of Parliament for obedience to
allowing Church-men to climb unto the highest Places of State be most opposite to Monarchy let any Man judge And although the Prelats acknowledge dependance upon their Prince they but only do what the Popes did who for a long time acknowledged their dependance upon the Emperour and sought◠their Election or the Confirmation thereof from him untill by little and little they got to stand upon their own Legs to almost the overthrow and ruine of their Soveraign and Benefactor Now Prelacy and Popery being really one and the same Government Princes ought to fear no less Mischief from the one than from the other Section III. Their Argument taken from Order weighed ANother Achillean Argument they bring from the Nature of Order which they say is wholly inconsistent with Parity Hence one of their Coryphaei brandishing it to the end he might compleat the Demonstration cited Aristotle himself for the Definition of Order which saith he is secundum quem aliquid altero prius aut posterius dicitur For that unhappy word simul would have spoil'd the whole Business and therefore must be left out And certain it is that none of them can improve this Argument any more than he has done seeing according to the express Definition of Order a Parity is no less consistent therewith than Superioty and Inferiority § 2. Moreover if this Topick do them any service it shal at length establish a Pope over them all seeing a Parity of superior Officers as Bishops or Arch-bishops is no less Cyclopick and Monstrous for with these names they calumniat Presbytry than a Parity of Pastors Yea by this their Argument it is manifest how they reproach most of the reformed Churches as if there were nothing there but a Babylonish Confusion and the Apostles themselves none of whom I think took the Oath of Canonical Obedience to another Moreover whosoever denies a Parity in a plurality of Governours tho' the chiefest in a Society as if 't were unwarranted by Example and tending to Confusion discovers either his Ignorance or what is worse seeing it is well known that at the same time there was a plurality of Kings in Sparta of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Princes in Athens and of Consuls in Rome during which Governments there was I am sure as little Disorder as when they were in the Hands of one single Man So much is really affirmed by their own learned Sutlivius who brings store of such Examples and irrefragably evinces our Purpose so true it is that none can smartly oppose the Pope's Crown but must eâdem operâ were he as indeed Sutlivius is the greatest Friend to Prelats ruffle also their Mytres Section IV. The Plea for Prelacy drawn from Unity discuss'd NO less fiercely do they argue that Episcopacy is altogether necessary on the account of Vnity Without which say they there can be nothing but Schism and Dtvision and therefore the Ancient Church sustain'd it But altho' this might have deceiv'd some of the Ancients whose ends were good though this mean fell out ineffectual yea unhappy whereby to obtain them yet it is strange that any now if at all they reflect on past times can place any confidence in such Church-policy in order to procure Peace and Unity seeing it is of all things most undeniable that notwithstanding hereof the primitive Church was opprest and rent with innumerable Schisms hatch'd and sustain'd by Bishops in opposition to Bishops no less at least than by Presbyters in opposition to Presbyters Yea it is certain that these whom they contend to be Diocesans were either the Inventers or at least the main Propagators and Abettors thereof Were not Victor of Rome and Polycrates of Ephesus the Authors of that great Schism and Controversie anent the Celebration of Easter Were not Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian of Carthage Authors of another Schism about Rebaptizing of the lapsed Was not Paulus Bishop of Samosata Author of that non-such Schism and Heresie of the Samosatenians Did not the mighty Schism of the Donatists fall out because Sicilianus Competitor with Donatus was preferr'd And when the Heresie of the Bishop of Samosata was varnish'd by a Presbyter Arrius how was it hugg'd and propagated by the bulk of the Oriental Bishops Was not Macedonius Bishop of Constantinople the Author of that most damnable Heresie known by his Name Again Nestorius Bishop of that same City gave both Being and Name to another Schism no less dangerous than the former Time would fail me to reckon up Berillus Bostrensis Nepos an Egytian Bishop Fidus in Africk Photinus of Syrmium with many others And in short few Heresies or Schisms sprang up in these Times but they had either Bishops for their Authors or else for their great Abettors without whose influence they were likely shortly to have starved or else they were raised through the Pride and Competition of men aspiring to the Episcopal Dignity which to name no others is clear in the Instance of Donatus Yea that all the blackest Schisms and most pestilent Heresies had Bishops for their Authors Sutlivius expresly affirms But take one Instance further in respect of which the rest are but Grasshopers in the Person of the Romish Bishop or Bishops who have been the great Authors and Fomenters of the most damnable Heresies and mighty Schisms that the Christian World hath hitherto seen Certainly had the Church contented Herself with the Apostolick Parity we plead for the Man of Sin could not have mounted the Throne of Iniquity on which for many Ages he hath continued to the most pestiferous Infection and distracting Division of the Church that ever Satan did excogitat or Man behold § 2. Moreover suppose they could with the greatest plausibility conclude the inconsistancy of Unity and Parity they were yet to be neglected it being certain that in the choisest Assembly the World ever saw both of 'em were harmoniously lodged and that there are Christian Churches enjoying no less Harmony without Diocesans than those who have ' em Section V. The Argument Prelatists bring from Antiquity canvass'd THeir next Plea is from Antiquity but for us it may be enough to say from the Beginning it was not so Thus Christ answer'd the Pharisees thus the Christians answer'd the Heathens alledging the Antiquity of Gentilism They can give few or no Proofs for their Proposition from the first and best part of the second Century They pretend indeed to the Epistles of Ignatius which to say the best are in divers places spurious carrying Self-contradictions vain Boastings and Flattery all along but of this more afterward Other Catalogues and Memorials of the Bishops of the ancientest Times were written long after when Prelacy had got a higher ascendant and the Mystery of Iniquity was more palpably working therefore these Authors spoke according to and in the Style of their own times and not in the Style of the times wherein these Pastors lived And here I say nothing but what is vouch'd by Dr.
Stilling fleet And amongst many others these his wâ—ords are most observable for having taken notice that Eusebius makes it a most hard Matter to know who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches they planted adds say you so is it so hard a Matter to find out who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches planted by them unless it be mention'd the Writings of Paul What becomes then of our unquestionable Line of Succession of the Bishops of several Churches and the large Diagrams made of the Apostolick Churches with every one's Name set down in his Order as if the Writer had been Clarenceaulx to the Apostles themselves Is it come to this at last that we having nothing certain but what we have in Scriptures And must then the Tradition of the Church be our Rule to interpret Scriptures by An excellent way to find out the Truth doubtless to bend the Rule to the croocked stick c. Again it 's certain that for divers Centuries Bishops were nothing like what they are now either in exercising Civil Power or Jurisdiction over other Pastors or yet in the largeness of Dioceses so that the Term Bishop in respect of the two is little better than an equivocal It 's certain also that the ancient Church wanted not her own Blemishes which was well perceived by her Doctors who still look'd on the Word of God only as the Rule of Faith and Manners on which they never founded the Episcopal Superiority Hence this their Argument carries nothing of Cogency Section VI. The Instance of Aërius condemn'd by Epiphanius prov'd to be unserviceable to our Antagonists TO Illustrat and Corroborat this their Argument from Antiquity they adduce the Instance of Aërius who was for this his Judgement of Presbytry as well as for Arrianism condemn'd and counted Heretick by Epiphanius But it is certain that Epiphanius censur'd Aërius not only for his being Anti-episcopal and as he believ'd because Arrian but also for his rejecting of Lents set and Anniversary Fasts and for denial of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead Now either purer Antiquity join'd with Epiphanius in asserting of the necessity of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and other such Fopperies or they did not and if they join'd with him therein then our Prelatists if they be Protestants are concern'd to reflect better of how little weight their Argument from the Ancients pressing their unwarrantable Additions can be unto them But if they say that sounder Antiquity consented not to Epiphanius while he urged Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and such Anti-scriptural Fictions we return that neither did the choicest of the Ancients agree with him in his Plea for Prelacy The Judgement of Hierom is so well known herein that the Bishop of Spalato acknowledges that Hierom can by no means yea not byforce be reconcil'd to their Cause Hierome's Judgement saith Saravia was private all one with that of Aërius and contrary to the Word of GOD wherefore we shall examine his Arguments And on this account he is much offended with Hierome accusing him of Vanity Self-contradiction and Prevarication And Alphonsus de Castro sharply reproveth Thomas Waldensis another Papist who had intended to pervert the Testimonies which are commonly alledg'd for Presbytry out of Hierome There De Castro having prov'd out of divers places of Hierome that he was truly for the Scriptural and Apostolick Idenity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter concludes against Waldensis that of necessity there must be another way taken to Answer the Passages alledg'd out of Hierome for Presbytry And at length flatly opposes himself to Hierome in this Matter and saith that we ought rather to believe the Decrees of Popes and Councils than the Doctrine of Hierome though both very Holy and Learn'd And Medina another Champion of the Hierarchy cited by Bellarmine asserts the same of Hierome saying He was of the same Judgement with Aërius in this Matter Bellarmine is very displeas'd with his Brother for his Ingenuity and therefore attempts to bring Hierome over to the Episcopal Party but instead of performing this Task he only fruitlesly endeavours to set Hierome at variance with himself The like success had another of the same Fraternity who like Bellarmine attempted to draw Hierome to his Faction Bayly the Jesuit And yet with these the most disingenous of the whole fry of Loyolites some called Protestants stick not warmly to join themselves and plead for a Patrociny to their Cause from Hierome § 3. Yea not only was Hierome of the same Judgement anent Episcopacy with Aërius but also as even the Jesuite Medina acknowledges the most of the Greek and Latine primitive Doctors and in special Ambrosius Augustinus Sedulius Primasius Chrysostomus Theodoretus Oecumenius Theophilactus This their Opinion saith Medina was first condemned in Aërius then in the Waldenses and lastly in Wicklef but this Doctrine was either dissembled or tolerated by the Church in them for the Honour that was had to them while on the other hand it was always condemn'd in these Men as Heretical because in many other things they swerv'd from the Church Many Papists and other Prelatists cannot away with this Medina's free dealing and use many shifts to refute him and draw these Fathers to their Party But to use the Words of Rivet Whosoever shall consider their Answers collested by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth lib. 6. annot 319 323 324. they shall presently perceive that all their Distinctions are most pitifull Elusions and that indeed all these Fathers were no less Presbyterian than Aërius although they accommodat themselves to the Custom then received least for a Matter not contrary to the Foundations of Religion they should have broken the Vnity of the Church What do our Opposits herein but espouse what the Romanists in whom any ingenuity remains have long since disowned § 4. But tho' Epiphanius were the mouth of all Antiquity and the only fit Judge in this Controversie the Triumph of our Adversaries should be very small for Aërius to Prove the Idenity of the two having adduced a parallel of many particulars Epiphanius denieth nothing of these to belong to Presbyters except only Imposition of Hands he yeelds therefore that both of them equally have Power to Baptize to occupy the Chair and finally to perform all Divine Worship Our Antagonists therefore offering to vouch the Prelacy they plead for by the Authority of Epiphanius promise much more then they can perform for what pray is this Power of Imposition of Hands or Ordination compared with what they covet and pretend to support by Epiphanius his Authority I mean the both great and many Differences between Bishop and Presbyter § 5. In the mean while Epiphanius his unjust dealing towards Aërius is most palpable for he sticks not to give out that Aërius his Judgement of the Identity of Bishop Presbyter was look'd on by the whole Church as an intolerable Heresie condemned by the Word of God when
Presbyters elected and ordain'd their Bishop There is nothing saith D. M. said by Boethius but that the Bishops were elected from among both the Priests and Monks And true it is there is no more said in the words D. M. cites but 't is as true that elsewhere Boethius expresly says that the Pastors Priests or Culdees themselves by common suffrage elected this Pontificem or Prefect Add hereto that if Boethius have said ought inadvertantly or obscurely he is to be correct'd or explain'd by the harmonious and most express Testimonies of Fordun Major Buchanan Craig and other such most learn'd of our Antiquaries all of whom are beyond scruple most positive for what we affirm § 11. Next he assaults Prosper's Testimony alledging that according to Baron Palladius was not sent to the Scots in Britain Baronius saith D. M. never thought that Palladius was sent by Pope Coelestine to the Scoto-Britanni but rather to the Irish. And whatever the Testimony of Prosper be Spondanus and Baronius leave the Vindicator for they understood Prosper ' s words of Palladius his mission to Ireland and not to that part of Britain which is now call'd Scotland To prove this his Assertion he adduces but which was his wisdom untranslated these words of Baron that he viz. Palladius was brought also into the Isle of Ireland but was soon taken away by Death is related by Probus who wrote the Deeds of St. Patrick Egregiously reason'd Probus saith that Palladius went once into Ireland therefore Baron thought the words of Prosper not at all to be understood of his coming into Scotland Surely this Author may be allow'd a chief place in their next Book of Sports for the Sabbath Yea these words that he was brought also c. seem clearly to hold forth that he was sent to another place beside out of which he came into Ireland and what place this was the immediatly preceeding words evince the same year and in the time of the same Consuls St. Prosper saith that Palladius was sent to the Scots being ordain'd the first Bishop That he continues Cardinal Baron was brought also into the Isle of Ireland c. Where 't is most evident that Baron distinguishes the Scots to whom Prosper saith Palladius was sent from the Inhabitants of Ireland But to cut off all further debate of this matter the Cardinal clearly demonstrats what we plead for while he expresly says that they highly honour Palladius his Relicts which are buri'd in the Mernes a Province of Scotland And the Cardinal continuing his Discourse of the same Scots whose first Bishop in his Judgement Prosper makes Palladius to have been saith that their late Queen viz. Mary was the Glory of the Catholick Faith and a Martyr but I insist not on a matter so evident the Advocat hath learn'dly made it out and prevented all such attempts of D. M. and the like Enemies of our Countrey § 12. He having thus abus'd Baron prepares next for the depravation of Prosper himself telling us that all that can be inferr'd is that Palladius was the first Bishop of the Roman mission But Prosper's words are clear and without any such limitation Palladius saith he is ordain'd by Pope Coelestine for the Scots that had already believed in Christ and is sent to them to be their first Bishop Behold our very Assertion and why we should yeeld it and in lieu thereof imbrace its contrary I am yet to learn He adds that as soon as the Pope aspired to his unlimited and universal Supremacy there were several Bishops sent to other Churches already constituted not to introduce Episcopacy which was the Government of the universal Church but rather a subjection to and uniformity with the Roman See But tho' all this were as true as some of it is false it 's nothing to the purpose except he find good Authors wherein a Bishop sent to a People who not only were Christians but also govern'd by Bishops before he came is called without restriction their first Bishop And Boethius continues D. M. understood the History of Palladius in this sense Which tho' 't were yeelded stands him in little stead seeing all the Historians Antiquaries of our Countrey and as we have heard from Card. Baron with whom joins our learn'd Advocat all men every-where else understand Prosper in the sense we plead for believing that there was no Bishop in Scotland before Palladius But 't will not satisfie D. M. to wrest Prosper's words except he also at once overthrow his whole Chronicle telling us that it is not thought by the learned to be the genuine Work of Prosper All he brings for this is a conjecture of Petrus Pithoeus fancying that the Chronicle ascrib'd to Prosper appended to that of Eusebius Hierome is of a different stile from that of a confus'd fragment which he took for a part of the true Prosper's Chronicle wherein there is nothing concerning Palladius But why the meer conjecture of one man should be enough to discredit that Chronicle so universally ascrib'd to Prosper I leave to the Judgment of the learned Vossius indeed mentions this fragment but if it be preferable to the vulgar Copy determines not neither for ought I know did ever any save D. M. embrace this faint Conjecture of Pithoeus and indeed there must be brought incomparably better Arguments before that confus'd fragment either be preferr'd to or vye with the universally receiv'd Copy immemorially under Prosper's name affixed to Hierome's Chronicle Moreover seeing this Schred is most disordered and the words now under debate most universally believ'd to have been written by Prosper 't is highly probable on supposition that this fragment is a part of the true consular Chronicle that it once contain'd that passage tho' throw mutilation and either negligent or malicious transcribing it hath now lost it however the matter be we are at no loss for never was there a sentence more unanimouâ—ly ascrib'd to any Author than this concerning Palladius is to Prosper and is by all both ancient and modern acknowledg'd so that all their endeavours to prove this passage supposititious and that it belongs not to Prosper or some else of equall Antiquity and Authority are the last efforts of meer desperation And indeed had they not in defiance of the whole Christian World and Truth it self resolv'd per fas aut nefas to maintain that there was never a Church without Diocesan Bishops before the time of Calvine and Beza they had never adventur'd their skulls on what is so hard firmly bottom'd and so universally believed Have we not already heard fully how the most knowing and zealous for Prelacy while they sustain'd the truth of our Countrey Histories and yet labour'd to disprove what we now plead for gave only in favours of their latter Assertion triffles so empty and prevarications so apparent that 't is most presumable they believ'd nothing of what they said how the
of our Freedom from Mystical Babylon our Adversaries acknowledging that Mr. Knox and his Fellow-labourers in the Church-policy did exactly follow the Genevan Model which these men use to make the Original of Presbytry It 's confess'd also that John Knox refus'd a Bishoprick in England on this account that it had Quid commune cum Antichristo Whereby tho' nothing else could be brought 't is clear as the Sun that Knox I may say the same of most of his Fellow-labourers in the Reformation was intirely averse from their Hierarchick Domination § 3. Wherefore the Author of a late Book call'd The Fundamental Charter of Presbytry examin'd and disprov'd quite skips over these Evidences of Knox's being Antiprelatick notwithstanding that the only design of the far greater part of his Book was directly to prove these out Reformers and Knox in special to have been of the prelatical Perswasion However let 's hear the chief of the Answers he gives to such other Proofs hereof as he adventures to engage with § 4. The first is a passage of Knox's letter to the Assembly viz. Vnfaithfull and Traitors to the Flock shall ye be before the Lord Jesus if that with your consent directly or indirectly ye suffer unworthy men to be thrust in within the Ministry of the Kirk under wâ—at pretence that ever it be Remember the Judge before whom ye must make an account and resist that Tyranny as ye would avoid Hell-fire To which our Author answers denying that Knox by Tyranny here means Episcopacy and saith that 't is impossible to make more of the Letter than that Knox deem'd it a pernicious and tyrannical thing for any Person whatsoever to thrust unworthy Men into the Ministry of the Church Which Answer evanishes so soon as we shall understand the occasion of Knox's Letter Some powerfull Courtiers had then sacrilegiously invaded a great part of the Churches Revenues and were greedily grasping the remainder to the great grief of all good Men and detriment of the Church which both in her Assemblies and otherways vehemently urged that these Revenues should be imploy'd on sustentation of Ministers many of whom being unprovided were ready to starve and on maintaining of Schools relieving the Poor and other such pious Uses These Courtiers therefore to free themselves of such unacceptable Monitors and secure them of what they had gotten plot the reduction of a kind of Diocesan Bishops Abbots Priors and other such Popish Orders with whom they were to make a sacrilegious Compact and to give these titular Church-men some small pittance of the Revenues the rest being possessed in their name by these Courtiers Now at the very time of the writing of Knox's Letter this was in agitation and a design laid to practise upon some of the Assembly as shortly thereafter at the Meeting in Leith appear'd at which and elsewhere in these times there were not wanting among the Ministers who moved with hope of Domination over their Brethren and some small augmentation of Rent made no bones of such simoniacal Pactions or to use the express words of the Confessions of their best Friends such durtâ— and vile Bargains And now judge what Knox mean'd by his Exhortation to keep out unworthy Men and resist Tyranny And 't is most presumable that Spotswood sufficiently saw that Knox's Letter goares Prelacy otherwise he had not mangl'd the same and wholly omitted all mention of Tyranny § 5. And that this Knox's Letter levell'd at the Bishops then about to be introduc'd is further evident from his refusal to inaugurat John Douglas Bishop of St. Andrews his denouncing an Anathema to the Giver and Receiver of the Bishoprick and his open professing his dislike of the whole Order At this our Author takes exception saying The certain Manuscript from which Calderwood says he had this relation is uncertain But he should have look'd into Petrie who names the Author William Scot that eminent Minister at Couper Now that 't is like enough that Knox who was then at St. Andrews said so and express'd suitable resentments of the durty Bargain between Morton and Douglas who by a simoniacal Paction got into the See is by our Author expresly acknowledg'd And indeed if we consider the indignity of the Crime and the Lyon-like boldness of Mr. Knox against such Vices 't is altogether incredible but that he vented his resentments with a Witness and to the noticing of all thinking Men then present yet all this is skipp'd over by Spotswood For he knew well enough that this Relation should have shew'd how little kindness Knox bore to their Hierarchy Moreover which is most noticeable in this matter these who then favour'd Prelacy being generally such simoniacal Pedlers were so far from writing the several Actions and Church-transactions of these times that they made it their care to suppress and destroy the publick Monuments of the Church Witness B. Adamsone one of the Articles of whose Confession to which as is acknowledg'd by Spotswood he subscrib'd was that not without his special allowance some leaves of the Books of the Assemblies were rent out and such things as made against the Bishops their estate were destroyed in Falkland before the Books were deliver'd to the King's Majesty Which considerations suffice to prove the truth of that historical Relation He alledges next that tho' we had reason to believe that Knox said and did so yet it follows not that he was for the Divine Right of Parity Adding That 't is like enough Knox said so for dreadfull Invasions were made upon the Patrimony of the Church But this Invasion was so linked with the introduction of Prelacy that they had both common Friends and Enemies so that Knox declaring against either must be judg'd equally averse from both And indeed the introduction of Prelacy was consequentially this very destruction and consumption of the Churches Goods against which Knox inveigh'd Or dare he say that it had satisfi'd him if they had been consum'd in sustaining the Luxury and Grandour of Bishops Abbots and Priors whom the Court was about then to introduce providing only these Church Revenues had been kept from the secular Nobility Moreover 't is evident to whosoever reads Knox's words that the Invasion of the Church-patrimony was far from being the sole Ground of the dislike he shew'd to Episcopacy The Matter in short is when John Douglas was made Tulchan Bishop of St. Andrews Mr. Knox refused to Ordain him denouncing Anathemaes to the Giver and to the Receiver and when John Rutherford Provest of the old Colledge had said that Mr. John Knox ' s repining had proceeded from male-contentment the next Lora's-day John Knox said in Sermon I have refus'd greater Bishoprick than ever 't was and might have had it with the favour of greater Men than he hath this but I did and do repine for discharge of my Conscience that the Church of Scotland be not subject to that Order This last Clause viz.
that the Church of Scotland be not subject to that Order he adventures not once to mention which yet is a reason of Knox's repining and so gives the meaning of his whole Discourse And seeing 't is of equal credit with his foregoing words being not only with the rest taken by Petrie out of that Historical Relation but related also by Calderwood fully scatters all his fogg and clearly determines the present Question somewhat else he hath here but of small moment As Knox when Douglas who was already Rector of the Vniversity and Provest of the old Colledge was made Bishop regrated that so many Offices were laid on an old Man which scarcely twenty of the best Gifts were able to bear Thence he Infers that Knox ' s resentment of Douglas his advance was not from any Perswasion he had of the unlawfulness of Prelacy As if Knox might not assert the unlawfulness of Prelacy and yet say so much for a a Superpondium to his other Grievances And to shew even on Supposition as they pretended of the allowableness of Episcopacy how little sence of Duty or Conscience was in either Givers or Receivers § 6. There was at this time saith M. D. Hume no small Contest and Debate betwixt the Court and the Church about Bishops and Prelats concerning their Office and Jurisdiction The Ministers laboured to have them quite abolished and taken away and the Court thought that form of Government to be agreeable and compatible with a Monarchical Estate and more conform to the Rules of Policy and Civil Government of a Kingdom Besides the Courtiers had tasted the sweetness of their Rents and Revenues putting in titular Bishops who were only their Receivers and had a certain Pension or Stipend for discharging and executing the Ecclesiastical part of their Office but the main profit was taken up by Courtiers for their own use Wherefore they laboured to retain at least these shadows of Bishops for letting of leases and such other things which they thought were not good in Law otherways There was none more forward to keep them up than the Earl of Morton for he had gone Ambassadour to England on his own privat Charges and to recompence his great Expenses in that Journey the Bishoprick of St. Andrews being then vacant was conferr'd upon him He put in Mr. John Douglass who was Provost of the New Colledge in St. Andrews to bear the Name of Bishop and to gather the Rents till such time as the Solemnity of Inauguration could be obtain'd for which he was countable to him This he did immediatly after he came home out of England Now he will have him to sit in Parliament and to vote there as Arch-bishop The Superintendent of Fyfe did inhibit him to sit there or to Vote under pain of Excommunication Morton commanded him to do it under pain of Treason and Rebellion The Petition giv'n in to the Parliament desiring a competent Provision for the maintaince of Preachers in which they complained of the wrong done unto them by the Courtiers who intercepted their means was cast over the Bare and rejected and by the most common report Morton was the first cause thereof Afterward Morton in a Meeting of some Delegats and Commissioners of the Church at Leith by the Superintendent Dune's means used the matter so that he obtain'd their Consent to have his Bishop admitted and install'd Wherefore the third of February he caus'd affix a schedul on the Church door of St Andrews wherein he charged the Ministers to conveen and admit him to the Place which they did accordingly but not without great Opposition For Mr. Patrick Adamson then a Preacher but afterward Arch-bishop there himself in a Sermon which he preached against the Order and Office of Bishops said there were three sorts of Bishops 1. The Lords Bishop to wit Christ's and such was every Pastor 2. My Lord Bishop that is such as Bishop as is a Lord who sits and Votes in Parliament and exercises Jurisdiction over his Brethren 3. And the third sort was my Lord's Bishop that is one whom some Lord or Nobleman at Court did put into the place to be his Receiver to gather the Rents and let Leases for his Lordship's behoofe but had neither the Means nor Power of a Bishop This last sort he called a Tulchan Bishop because as the Tulchan which is a Calves skin stuff'd with straw is set up to make the Cow give down her milk so are such Bishops set up that their Lords by them may milk the Bishopricks Likewise Mr. Knox preached against it the tenth of February and in both their hearings Morton's and his Arch-bishop to their Faces pronunced Athathema danti Anathema accipienti And We shewed before how in matters of Church-government he ever inclined as the most politique Course to the state of Bishops The Name was yet retained by Custom◠the Rents were lifted also by them as we have said more for other Mens use and profit than their own They had also place and vote in Parliament after the old manner and he would gladly have had them to have keeped their Power and Jurisdiction over their Brethren Master John Douglass being dead he fill'd the place by putting in Mr. Patrick Adamson his domestick Chaplain who then followed that Course tho before he had preach'd against it Many were displeas'd herewith all the Ministers especially they of the greatest Authority and all Men of Estates that were best affected to Religion And which he cites out of an English Historian Francis Botevill As touching his viz. Morton's setting up and maintaining the estate of Bishops whereof there had ensued great debate and contention betwixt him and the Ministry he said it did not proceed of an ill mind of any malice or contempt of them or their Callings but meerly out of want of better knowledge thinking that Form of Government to be most conform to the Rules of Policy and to be fittest for the times That if he had then known better he would have done otherways And He viz. Morton was also calm this appeared in his carriage toward Mr. Knox who had used him roughly and rebuk'd him sharply for divers things but especially for his labouring to set up and maintain the estate of Bishops Hence 't is most manifest how not only Knox but also the whole body of our Church disliked and hated the very first bud and likeness of Prelacy and how by meer force and fraud of the voracious Court-politicians upon the dishonesty of some but the unwariness and faintness of many moe of the Ministry These monstrous Tulchans for all men even our present Prelatists are ashamed of them got that minot's harbour in Scotland § 7. Our Author Answers for he insists long on this matter That the Question is not now how this was done but if it was done For if it was done it is an Argument that the Clergy then thought little on the iudispensibility of Parity Just
as if what any man either by Fraud or Force is made seemingly to yeeld to were to be taken for his true and genuine Sentiments I thought this kind of reasoning had been peculiar to a Spanish Inquisitor or French Converter Or that they were bad Men continues he a hard construction For then Hierome of Prague who was forc'd and so many of the choice Fathers of the Council of Arminum who were trick'd to admit in appearance something contrary to their true Sentiments shall all be bad men That the Ministers at this Convention at Leith dealt most unwarily and some of 'em also with too little integrity is beyond scruple But that all of 'em or most of 'em were poor covetous Rogues c. neither Petrie nor any of his Perswasion ever affirmed He adds that the Courts Arguments for the Leith-establiment were mainly Politick for they turn'd not Theologues to perswade Episcopacy's Divine Institution from Scripture c. Well then there was little true Piety no consulting of Conscience or the Word of God in the Matter And if some of the Ministry as he says were taken with these politick and state Reasons they in so far fell from their own Principle viz. That in the Books of the Old and New Testament all things necessary for the instruction of the Church and to make the Man of God perfect are contain'd and sufficiently express'd But the Clergy saith he had found that the new Scheme of the first Book of Discipline had done much hurt to the Church As if the old Popish Scheme under which the Churches goods by God's Law destinated for the promoval of piety and learning and sustaining of the poor were consum'd and debauch'd in upholding the grandour and luxury of a spurious ecclesiastick Nobility could have been really more profitable to the Church than that of the Book of Discipline on of the prime designs whereof was the bestowing of the Church Revenues for these their true uses to which God's Law had appointed them Or as if Pastors Schools and Poor can in no place be provided for where the Romish Church-policy is wanting But The six Commissioners saith he that treated with the State at Leith were sensible Men and far from being Parity-men Just so far from being Parity-men that most of 'em in an Assembly 1580. July 12. deliberately found and declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self He intimats that the Courts motive for the Leith-establishment could not be their desire to possess the Churches Patrimony An untruth as we have now seen too bare fac'd to need more refutation His proof hereof is of the same stamp viz. Had the Clergy fall'n so suddenly from their constant claim to the Churches Revenues did that which moved them to be so earnest for this meeting with the State miraculously slip out of their minds Seeing not the Church but the Court-politicians as is evident with desire to circumveen her chiefly procur'd that meeting and if these Delegates were either the only or first men who by sinistrous Artifices fell into a bad Compact then let him exclaim with admiration of this matter what follows is yet odder viz. Was it not as easy for the Court to have possessed themselves of a Bishoprick an Abbacy a Priory c. when there were no Bishops as when there were For he 's to be pitied if he be ignorant that the Courtiers having no Law-title thereto had no hope save under covert of their own Creatours these titular Bishops of any peaceable and secure possession of the Churches Revenues But an undoubted Assembly saith he own'd the Leith convention as an Assembly and its Authority as the Authority of an Assembly and for several years after that establishment at Leith beside which there was no other fond for owning them for Bishops Bishops were present and as such were obliged to sit and vote in general Assemblies and many Acts of subsequent Assemblies put this matter beyond all probability of ever being controverted as the Assembly in August 1574. which petitioneth the Regent that Stipends be granted to Superintendents in all time coming in all Countries destitute thereof whether it be where there is no Bishop or where there are Bishops who cannot discharge their Office as the Bishop of St. Andrews and Glasgow And that his Grace would provide qualified Persons for vacant Bishopricks But this tho' it be his prime Argument is soon removed our Church knew that divers Ministers and others had been allur'd or aw'd to that agreement She knew that 't was only made for the Interim and for the Interim only did she tolerate it with a full resolution to have a more perfect Order And as for the words In all time coming there 's not a syllabe of them in the Act he cites Nor indeed any where else of all the Acts of these Assemblies She knew also that during that Interim 't was impossible to get that which had been the Revenues of Popish Bishops other Church Rents out of the Regent and other Courtiers their hands In the mean while the vast number of unplanted Churches weakness of the Ministry in divers parts and unsettlement even unto that time of the Churches Affairs allow'd for a space the continuance of Evangelistick Superintendents or Commissioners who were to be in almost perpetual motion and travels and therefore needed much larger maintainance then did fixed Pastors which large maintainance the Church being thus strip'd of her Patrimony could not afford to the number that was needfull On these and such Grounds the Church indulged to that Convention the name of an Assembly tolerated in these Tulchans the name of Bishops And seeing they had got more Rent then was giv'n to ordinary Ministers allowed them to exercise the Labour and Travel of Superintendents or Commissioners And thus the Church made the best she might of that their unlawfull Bargain And tho' which he also objects some Assemblies allow Bishops to conveen and proceed against delinquents command Ministers by their Letters to admonish concerning persons to be excommunicated it helps him nothing seeing the very Acts he cites give no less power to Superintendents yea to Commissioners whom yet the Church used even after she had declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self So far is our Churches tolerating for a space these Tulchans from being any Argument that she believ'd not the Divine Right of Parity But how appears't saith he that our Church receiv'd the Leith Articles only for an Interim out of a dislike to Episcopacy And there were other things in the Articles which required amendment But sure these Articles were without any exception receiv'd and tolerated only for the Interim and how well these court-Court-bishops were liked is already made manifest and our Churches subseqnent actings declare which never rested but still wrestled against the storms of both Power and Policy untill they were sent packing 'T is true as he says the Church met with Opposition but that this was
only from these titular Bishops and Rent-gatherers to the Courtiers supported with all the might Wit and Artifice of an awfull gripping politick Regent and no few other potentand subtile Courtiers driving their own ends as has already appeared and is most evident from the best accounts now extant of these Affairs and this is the undoubted Cause why the six Collocutors at the Assembly in August 1575. think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the Question of the Function of Bishops But he who stilleth the noise of the Seas the noise of their waves having restrain'd these impetuous Tempests how cordially did our Church proceed to the utter extirpation of Prelacy Forsamekle they are the words of the Assembly holden at Dundee Anno 1580. July 12. Sess. 4. as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realme hath no sure warrant authority or good ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but brought in by the folly and corruption of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God the whole Assembly of the Kirk in one voice after liberty given to all Men to reason in the matter none opponing themself in defence of the said pretended Office findeth and declareth the samine pretended Office used and termed as is above said unlawfull in the self as having neither fundament ground nor warrant in the word of God c. And in all this our Church as she clearly here expresses did nothing save what she was oblig'd to do by her own Principle in the first Book of Discipline which affirms that all thing necessary for the instruction of the Church is contain'd in the Books of the Old and New Testament And that whatsoever is without express commandment of God's Word is to be repress'd as damnable to Salvation Our Reformers therefore except our Adversaries say which even impudence it self dare not say that they believ'd the Hierarchy to be founded on the express command of God's Word were bound by this their Principle to oppose it as a manifest corruption and according to this Principle whensoever Prelacy by force of the secular arm and fraud of serpentine policy and as one well words it by terrors and allurements crosses and commodities banishment and benefices for by other means it could never be admitted overwhelm'd this Land and discover'd the Hypocrisie or Gallio-like Disposition of many all the true Lovers of our Reformation still then had in greater or lesser measure as their love was to this truly Protestant yea truly Catholick and Christian Principle of our Reformers their Feasts turned into Mourning their Songs into Lamentation their Tears for Meat and their Harps hang'd on the Willows And now suppose that our Reformers in that unstable condition of our Church and very first rudiments of Protestancy had in some of their Doings or Saying afforded some colour or appearance either for the scruples of the curious or the quirks and cavils of the captious does not pray this most unanimous most clear and every way most unexceptionable Act of our most full and free Generall Assembly that consisted for the far greater part of the very same Men who were the Actors and Promoters of our first Reformation most fully open our Remormers their minds shew their ultimat tendency and scope and finally for ever determine the present Controversie § 8. He hath more to say of John Knox I return therefore to attend him His next Plea is with Calderwood about Beza's Letter to Knox where he denies that Beza wrote being inform'd by Knox of the Courts intention to bring in Bishops and adds that if any thing of Knox ' s Sentiments can be collected from Beza ' s Letter it seems rather he was for Prelacy than for Presbytry For Beza saith he seems clearly to import that Knox needed to be caution'd against Prelacy Beza's Words are But I would have you my dear Knox and the other Brethren to Remember that which is before your eyes that as Bishops brought foorth the Papacy so false Bishops the relicts of Popery shall bring in Epicurism to the World They that desire the Churches good and safety let them take heed of this Pest and seeing ye have put that Plague to flight timously I heartily pray you that Ye never admit it again albeit it seem plausible with the pretence or colour of keeping unily which pretence deceiv'd the ancient Fathers yea even many of the best of ' em Where Beza without giving any proof thereof clearly supposes as a thing believed by Knox no less than by himself that the Bishops whom some were then labouring to introduce into Scotland were false Bishops the relicts of Popery which had already been once driv'n out of Scotland and on this supposition as any Orators use to do from Principles common to themselves and these to whom they are speaking he admonish'd him and the rest to beware of this Plague Certain it is then if we believe Beza that he knew if by a Letter from Knox or otherwise concerns not the matter in hand that Knox judg'd the Bishops then to be introduc'd to be no others than were the Popish Bishops whom Knox and his fellow Reformers had lately expuls'd Scotland and both sorts of Bishops to be equally false and Anti-christian And now consider this Letter of Beza written near the same time with that of Knox to the Assembly and the disinterested shall soon perceive that the former explains the latter and sufficiently shews what Knox meant by the Tyranny mention'd therein Moreover whosoever finds so much against Episcopacy in Beza even tho' it had been spoken by him without any relation or respect to Knox and remembers how universal and firm Concord was between these excellent Persons Qui duo corporibus mentibus unus erant will easily conclude that Knox bore but small kindness to Prelacy § 9. He comes next to prove Knox was not for Parity Had he been saith he so perswaded how seasonable had it been for him to have spoken out so mnch when he was brought before King Edward ' s Council The Question was then put to him whether he thought that no Christian might serve in the Ecclesiastical Ministration according to the Rites and Laws of the Realm of England Yet he answer'd nothing but that no Minister in England had Authority to separate the Lepers from the whole which was a chief part of his Office Plainly founding all the unlawfulness of being a Pastor of the Church of England not only the unlawfulness of the Hierarchy which he spoke not one word about but on the Kings retaining the chief Power of Ecclesiastical Discipline As if Knox had judg'd nothing in the Church of England unlawfull but the King 's retaining the Ecclesiastical Discipline in his own hand which all Men even Episcopals no less than Presbyterians know to be an arch and palpable untruth Does not as for example our Assembly Anno 1566.
Office for which they were separated was neither new nor perpetual § 17. Having overthrown the Reasons of his Gloss it must yeeld to the Text expresly telling us they were erected only for that time and that for the paucity of Ministers endowed with singular Graces But this reason says he is nought For suppose we 20 30 40 Men in the Kingdom qualifi'd for the Office of the Ministry could not these have divided the Kingdom into a proportionable number of large Parishes And still as more Men turn'd qualifi'd could they not have lessen'd these greater Parishes But he with whom our Reformers were all most contemptible Idiots and more especially in Church-policy needs not wonder tho' they had fall'n into a much greater Solecism But he forgets that many in these most dark times were made Ministers who yet needed the Assistance and Direction of the better qualifi'd for a while in Church-policy and matters of such importance till they should be able to go hand in hand with them and that the main end of Superintendents was the perpetual Travelling Preaching and Instructing where there were no Pastors and planting of Churches As well continues he as our Presbyterian Brethren now unite Presbytries A strange mistake as if where Presbytries are united any Minister took for his proper Charge a multitude of Parishes He here insinuats that in the Superintendents there was established a Prelacy But the present Question is only about the sentiments of our Reformers and that they never thought the use of Superintendents croffed the Doctrine of Parity is most clear were there no more from their using Superintendent-commissioners even after they had declar'd Episcopacy unlawfull in it self But all this their jangle is the fruit of meer prejudice or worse for none near these times look'd on Superintendency as perpetual Not the Court Party seeing they endeavour'd to change Superintendents for Tulchan Bishops not the rest of the Church who as the necessity of them decreased suffer'd them to wear out And after that in an unanimous Assembly they had ordain'd that the whole Church should be divided in a competent number of Presbytries declar'd that Superintendents were no longer expedient And good ground had they even from that very Book of Policy so to do for if the whole tenor of that Head of Superintendents appointing them almost constantly to Travel to Preach thrice a week at least and beside that to examine the Life c. of the Ministers the Orders of the Kirks the manners of the People care how the Poor be provided how the Youth be instructed admonish where it 's needfull by good Counsel compose Differences note and delate to the Kirk hainous Crimes and all this because of the paucity of qualifi'd Ministers evidently proclaims not that this Superintendent was a kind of Evangelist expedient only at that juncture of the re-entry of the Gospel into Scotland I appeal to the candid Judgement of the impartial Moreover if 't were otherwise why should they not as punctually have described his Duties after the time of his perpetual Travels his Preaching thrice a week and other such vast Labours were ended for he grants these were to indure but for a time after which he insinuats that the Superintendents were to remain quiet in their chief Towns but no word in all the account we have of them of such distinctions of times of such perpetual rest not a word therefore of their perpetuity Lastly which he wisely i. e. sutably to his purpose omitted for like the Council ask'd at Abel it ends the matter see this Head of Superintendents Because say they we have appointed a larger Stipend to them that shall be Superintendents than to the rest of the Ministers we have thought good to signifie to your Honours such Reasons as moved us to make difference betwixt Preachers at this time Now pray may not he that runs read here that had it not been for some forcing Circumstances and Exigencies of the then present time they had made no difference at all between one Minister and another And then after a few lines they laid down their Reasons in the very words the sense whereof is now under Debate If the Ministers c. § 18. In the mean while we need not be much concern'd whether these Superintendents were to be temporary or perpetual there being nothing therein that made any real difference between the Church-government which was then and that which is now And indeed these vast Travels and Pains in preaching thrice a week c. are sure enough Tokens that the Superintendent could not be much distinguish'd from an ordinary Pastor save in these extraordinary Labours and was far from the Episcopal Eminency and Grandour seeing he was so far from the Episcopal ease and idleness without which the former but rarely obtains This and other such Proofs of the vast difference between the Superintendents and their Diocesans and of the likeness between the Government under the Reformers and that which is now our Author slides over with rallry saying it may be as well told them that Bishops wore black Hats and silk Superintendents blew Bonets and tartan as if most constant and hard labour in the Gospel were no more valuable for distinguishing one Minister from another than highland Plydes and blew Bonnets He meets you with the like Drollery if you mind him that the Superintendents had no Metrapolitan and Episcopal Consecration or Ordination but it 's risus sardonius And his Questions What is this to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governours of the Church Do these differences distinguish between Bishops and Superintendents as to preheminence of Power flow from deep dissimulation of the mortal Wound giv'n to his Cause seeing without Episcopal Ordination which was never requir'd to a Superintendent For Knox as for example who with our Author was only a Presbyter ordain'd or admitted as they then spoke Spotswood Superintendent there can be no Episcopal Power no not so much as the very essentials of a Bishop These Superintendents were also without any Civil Places power or emoluments that way which make up the far greater part of the Episcopal greatness and still subject and accountable to the General Assemblies And there was reason for it saith our Author supposing that General Assemblies as then constituted were sit to be supream Judicatories of the National Church For there was no reason that Superintendents should have been Popes Then surely either were our Prelats Popes or most vehemently covetted a papal Power seeing above all things they fear'd abhorr'd and studi'd the ruine of these our General Assemblies And no wonder if they did so and that our Author intimats his dislike of these our Assemblies For if this one thing viz. the subjection of the Superintendents to these Assemblies as they were then constituted be duely weigh'd it 's fair to â—et them on the very same levell with their Brethren For give him never so great a Power in the Province where
Kirks is quite stiffled and the whole sense of the Act perverted For what sense is it I pray to say that the Ministers were Chosen by Consent of the rest of the Ministers when you tell not who was to choose or who they were to whose choice or nomination the rest of the Ministers were to give that Consent But to stiffle the Power he pleads for to Superintendents was a Work impossible either to Calderwood or any man else the very Act it self most irrefragbly shewing they could have none save such as is in any meer Moderator of our Synods or Presbytries For be it which yet the Assembly expresses not that the Superintendents were to nominate Ministers for the Assembly yet they could do no more but only as the Synod by their Votes assented or choosed the nominated Persons whom if the Synod or its major part rejected these could not go to the Assembly yet some behov'd to go and consequently the Superintendent or Commissioner was to make a new Lite and name again and if these did not yet please another Lite and so on untill the Synod was satisfi'd and choosed some Persons or other according to their pleasure for the Assembly This much is undeniably contain'd in the Act and I 'm sure no Moderator of any Synod or Presbytry injoyes any less Power providing it deserve the name Seeing then Brought with them cannot possibly mean any peculiar Power I see not wherein Calderwood by ommitting them can be culpable Neither can he be accused of nonsense seing 't is sufficiently intelligible and plain how these Ministers and Commissioners could be chosen by the consent of the rest of his Brethren the Ministers and Gentle-men members of the Synod who by joynt and mutual consent chused them after the Superintendent or Commissioners nominating or liting which by a fraud too palpable he confounds with Election And here it 's observable in how much torment and perplexity this so clear an Act involves all of ' em Spotswood adduc'd it in his latine Pamphlet but is so soundly chastis'd by the Vindicator of Philadelphus that our Author finds not a syllable to say in his defence He pretends also to relate it in his History but with an essential Depravation for he leaves out these words Ministers and Commissirners of Shires shall be chosen at the Synodal Convention of the Diocy with consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal Convention For he saw it quite spoil'd his Cause and really left the Superintendent no Power but what was equally in any of the rest and foists into the Text these such Ministers as the Superintendents should chuse in their Diocesan Synods Neither can our Author be blameless in suppressing the following words Commissioners of Burghs shall be appointed by the Council and Kirk of their own Towns none shall be admitted without sufficient Commission in write And least this should turn to perpetual Election of a few and certain Persons it is concluded Ministers and other Commissioners be changed from Assembly to Assembly Whereby appears the Churches great care that neither Superintendent nor any other might have ought like an Episcopal Power and that all fit Persons might have equal priviledge of Voting at the Assemblies There yet remain many of his pretended Disparities but are no more significative of eminency or superiour Office no less communicable to the rest of the Ministers when Commissioners than were the former as will be evident to any who reads the Acts of the Assemblies among which he reckons the Superintendent 's modifying to Ministers their Stipends as if because Judas had the Bagg and bare what was put therein he had been Bishop over the rest of the Apostles In the mean while the Superintendents could do nothing of this but only as Moderator of the provincial Synod Another Deduction of no better metall is that the Laird of Dun Superintendent of Angus not as such but by vertue of a particular Commission giv'n by the Assembly to him and others join'd with him deposed a Regent of Aberdeen a place intirely without the bounds of his Superintendency therefore Superintendents as such had a Power Paramount and Episcopal And was not such an arguer a man of sense I pass the rest of his thirty Disparities not without admiration that such a fertile brain could not invent one other for one and thirty used to carry the Game Add to all this that tho' some that had been Popish Bishops in Scotland and imbrac'd the Gospel as Mr. Gordon of Galloway a man of no contemptible Gifts were by our Reformers allow'd without any new Admission to dispence the Word aud Sacraments yet they were never allow'd to exercise what they counted their Episcopal Function or looked on as Bishops of these Dioceses yea Mr. Gordon tho' he earnestly sought for it could never be admitted to Superintend in Galloway which is a clear Demonstration that our Reformers looked on the Episcopal preheminence as a meer Popish Corruption otherways why did not Mr. Gordon verbi causâ remain in the Power and Character he had enjoyed while Romanist It 's most clear also from all the accounts we have of the Tulchan Bishops that all men of all parties look'd on a Bishop as a thing altogether diverse from a Superintendent § 20. And now at length hear him yeelding the whole Plea There was saith he a Principle had then got too much footing among some Protestant Divines viz. That the best way to reform a Church was to recede as far from the Papists as they could to have nothing in common with them but the essentials the necessary and indispensable Articles and Parts of Christian Religion whatever was in its Nature indifferent and not positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures if it was in fashion in the Popish Churches was therefore to be laid aside and avoided as a Corruption as having been abused and made subservient to Superstition and Idolatry This Principle John Knox was fond of and maintain'd zealously and the rest of our reforming Preachers were much acted by his influences In pursuance of this Principle therefore when they compil'd the first Book of Discipline they would not Reform the old Polity and purge it of such Corruptions as had crept into it keeping still by the main draughts and lineaments of it But they laid it quite aside and in stead thereof hammer'd out a new Scheme keeping at as great a distance from the old one as they could and as the essentials of Polity would allow them establishing no such thing however as Parity as I have fully proven And no wonder for as Imparity has obviously more of Order beauty and usefulness in its aspect so it had never so much as by dreaming entred their tboughts that it was a limb of Antichrist or a relict of Popery But was not Episcopacy in fashion in the Popish Churches And dare he yea or any mortal say that ever
our Reformers believed it to be an indispensible part of the Christian Religion positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures Do not therefore his saying establishing however no such thing as Parity c and the rest of his Discourse mutually give the lie and flee in the face of one another And indeed he here at once overthrows whatsoever he said on this Subject and now for ever to silence all reasonable men and stop them from such desperat adventures as this of our Authors take the following Argument Whatsoever our Reformers believed to be without the express and positive Testimony of the Scriptures that they believed to be a damnable Corruption in Religion and as such to be avoided This the major is put beyond scruple by what we have brought from the first Book of Discipline Knox and the Confessions of our Author Now I subjoin But they believed that Episcopacy was altogether without any express or positive Testimony yea or any Warrant or Ground from the Word of God the Books of the Old and New Testament Ergo c. The minor is no less evident from what is already adduc'd and moreover from the latter Helvetian Confession which was all save the allowance of the remembrance of some Holy Days which they expresly disprov'd approv'd and subscribed by our whole General Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1566. For in that Confession mark it pray carefully and by no means forget that our Church and Reformers who approv'd and subscrib'd this Confession firmly believ'd that whatsoever is without the express Commandment of God's Word is damnable to Man's Salvation they say There 's giv'n to all Ministers in the Church one and the same Power or Function And indeed in the beginning Bishops and Presbyters ruled the Church in common none preferr'd himself to another or usurped any more honourable Power or Dominion to himself over his fellow Bishops But according to the words of the Lord who will be first among you let him be your Servant they persevered in Humility and helped one another by their mutual Duties in Defending and Governing the Church In the meantime for preserving Order some one of the Ministers did call the Assembly and proposed these things that were to be consulted in the Meeting He did also receive the Opinions of others and finally according to his Power he took care that no confusion should arise so S. Peter is said to have done in the Acts of the Apostles who notwithstanding was never set over the rest nor indu'd with greater power and honour but the beginning took its rise from Vnity that the Church might be declared to be one And having related Hierome's Doctrine of the Idenity of Bishop Presbyier thus they conclude Therefore none may lawfully hinder to return to the ancient Constitution of the Church of God and embrace it before human Custome Thus far the Authors of that most famous Confession who both in the Title page and after the Preface expresly assert that our Church of Scotland together with the Churches of Poland Hungary Geneve Neocome Myllhusium and Wiend approved and subscribed this their Confession From all which it 's easie to gather and perceive with how black a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our first Reformers and whole primitive Church Protestant branded Prelacy or Imparity amongst Pastors Section IX The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian BUT let 's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers and Reform'd transmarine Churches Gerard a famous Lutheran divine altho' for Orders sake he admit of some kind of Episcopacy which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter The Papists saith he especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot And all along this Question he strongly proves that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary But we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines Luther himself being the mouth to the rest in the Articles of Smalcald It 's clear say they even from the Confession of our Adversaries that this Power to wit of preaching dispensing the Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution is common to all that are set over the Churches whither they be called Pastors Presbyters or Bishops Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter but that every Pastor was a Bishop Here Hierome teaches that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor was only appointed by humane Authority And the matter it self continues Luther and his Associats declares no less for on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor § 2. As for Calvin his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry for he asserts the Idenity of Bishop Presbyter Pastor and Minister and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7 as Hierome had done long before him and Presbyterians do now And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles he tells us that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters but was among them what the Consul was in the Senat and his Office was to propone Matters enquire the Votes preside in Admonition and moderat the Action and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator And that even this saith he was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza who every where is full sufficiently to our purpose both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus And were there any doubt concerning these as indeed there 's none their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd our very Adversaries being Judges sufficiently discuss it and prove them to be truly Presbyterian and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers Systematicks Controvertists and Commentators As for Example the famous and learn'd Musculus asserts and proves from
Acts 20. Philip. 1. and the like Texts which we now use that Bishop Pastor and Presbyter are all one and the same and that in one Church there were at one time conjunctly many Bishops Of the same mind are all the Systematick Divines yea even Tilen himself while Orthodox We judge saith he not only with Hierome but also with Lombard Gratian Card. Cusan and others that the preferring one out of the Colledge of Pastors to the rest and giving him the name of Bishop was a humane Invention This Author indeed alter'd his mind concerning Church Government when he pelagianiz'd for then he turns altogether tho' to his cost a Hectorer of the Zelots of the Genevan Discipline Time would fail me in collecting Testimonies of this kind seeing there were ever few I may say none save a small handfull in Britain who have not asserted that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as any distinction between Bishop and Pastor or preaching Presbyter and that among these there was an intire equality To these we may add the Testimonies of the most and famousest of the reformed Churches in their Confessions whereof we have seen not a few already while we related the Testimony of the Helvetian Confession together with the approbations thereof no less illustrious and pregnant is the Testimony of the French Consession We believe say they that all true Pastors where ever they be are endu'd with equal and the same power under that one Head Christ the Chief and Vniversal Bishop To the same purpose also speaks the Dutch Confession We believe say they that this true Church ought to be governed by that spiritual Policy so that there be in it Pastors or Ministers that may purely dispense the Word and Sacraments that there be also Elders and Deacons c. § 3. The harmonius and Catholick Testimony of all the reformed Churches are to some like pricks in their eyes and thorns in their sides and therefore most various and hetrogeneous means are used to render it unserviceable And amongst other things we are told that many forraign Divines and Churches have a great likeing for their Diocesan Way and Zanchius say they counts all its Opposers Schismaticks But Maresius answers that Zanchius never allow'd of a Lord Bishop but only of such a one who is like a Rector of a Colledge whose Power I 'm sure is little or nothing above that of a Moderator Maresius adds that he can find in no place of Zanchius the words Prideaux had alledg'd And lastly as Maresius tells us Zanchius professes that he cannot but love the zeal of such as hate the names of Bishop and Arch-Bishop fearing least with these Names the ancient Ambition and Tyranny together with the destruction of the Churches should return Prideaux also alledges that Calvin writing to the King of Poland advises him to establish Bishops and Arch-bishops But has the same return from Maresius viz. that this is the Bishop's own Dream and that there is no such thing to be found in Calvin This dealing is not very laudable Neither are Means wanting to procure Advocats from Abroad one whereof brings many things either to defend or excuse the Hierarchy and to shew that it 's not ill link'd abroad and amongst other things saith that notwithstanding of what is in the Helvetian Confession its Authors condemn not the Liberty of other Churches as they manifest in their Preface protesting that in all this Confession they agreed with the Church of England But this Author cann't be ignorant that seeing according to that Confession Christ gave equal Power to all Pastors and according to what is alledg'd to be the Judgement of the present Church of England he did the quite contrary Their Preface can by no means prove that they allow of the Sentiments and Practice of the present English Church except he would have the Preface to contradict the Confession But all this he says is only to darken an evident Truth the meaning of the Preface being that between the Helvetians and the English there was no such fundamental Difference as prohibited mutual Charity one to another which many have given and may give to these who as they judge retain'd many Errors tho' not Fundamental The same Author objects that many Churches and amongst others that of the Helvetians have either Bishops over their Pastors or which is really the same Superintendents But to instance in the Helvetians they in their Confession saying that Christ gave a like Power to all Pastors c. and therefrom concluding that none may hinder to return to Christ's primitive Institution make most apparent that they intended no continuation of any Superiority amongst Pastors and consequently of no Bistops or their equivalent Superintendents but all this work he makes is dicis gratia for the fashion only for if in Helvetia or else where there be any umbrage of Bishops or Superintendents it 's really an Obtrusion and Erastian Usurpation and this we may learn from himself freely acknowledging that the chief legislative Power in the Church matters is in the hands of the supream Magistrat Otherways he confesses that the choisest of Writers and amongst others Hoornbeck make the Discipline of the Scots French Dutch and Helvetian Churches to be one and the same Moreover he sufficiently answers himself while he expresly grants that between the Superintendents or Bishops through Germany and these of England there is an infinit difference and that these in Germany have only a simple prerogative of Order but not at all of any Jurisdiction or any thing that can be properly term'd Power Thus he And I 'm sure that any Pâ—aeses of an Assembly hath no less Superiority than he here ascribes to these transmarine Superintendents or Bishops and indeed shortly to give an account of this Author besides as we have now seen he is oblig'd to pull back with the one hand what he had bestow'd on the Hierarchicks with the other his whole Discourse leans upon this Supposition that there is no certain Form of Church Government left by Christ in his Word on this depend his Glosses upon the passages we produced of the French and Dutch Confessions Vide inter alia part spec a pag. 171 ad pag. 189 where he all along presupposes and inculcats that tho' according to the Authors of the Confessions Christ gave equal Power c. to all Pastors yet in their Judgement if the Church will she may alter this kind of Government and change that Equality which Christ gave for an Inequality and give some Pastors a Power over the rest Which if it be not a Contradiction to these Confessions in stead of an Explication it looks as like it is one Crow can be like another For who can believe but that if the Authors of these Confessions had believ'd an indifferency of Equality or Inequality of Pastors they had either intimated
so much or been altogether silent thereof neither of which they did but gave to the World solemnly as the Confession of their Belief that Christ gave to to all Pastors equal and the same power and yet if we believe this Interpreter this that Christ gave may according to the Authors of that Confession be relinquish'd when Men will and Inequality it 's quite contrary introduced in the place thereof Is not this too like the dealing of the Romanists who when they are compell'd to acknowledge that the Apostles gave the Cup to the People yet pretend that they may deprive them of what Christ and his Apostles gave them Divers indeed have said that Church Government was among the Adiaphora and things indifferent But these were more wary then to say as he would have the Authors of these Confessions to say that Christ gave equal and the same Power to all Pastors yea such used not to grant that Christ gave either Equality or Inequality of Power but left all to the Churches management Moreover as he does us no dammage so I 'm sure he does the present Hierarchicks as little service for if this Hypothesis that no kind of Church Government is juris divini stand then the jus divinum of Episcopacy is lost and therefore I 'm sure they shall give him as little thanks as we 'T is also observable that when ever the Authors of these Confessions or other Divines of their Perswasion said that Communion with Churches of a different Government was not to be broken or any thing of that kind he presently inferrs that they judg'd any other form no less agreeable to the word of God than their own And here I cann't but take nottice of what I have met with somewhere in M. Claude's historical defence of the Reformation for at present I have not the book viz. that Diocesan Episcopacy is no less condemnable than Pilgrimages Purgatories or some such Romish dotages which he there names and how averse he was from Diocesan Episcopacy is observed by the Prefacer to the English Translation and yet if we believe some he gave large Testimonies of his great affection to the Diocesan cause And this brings to mind another Artifice for when any Protestant Divines considering the great Power of Popish Bishops and vehemently desiring Peace for the free Preaching and Propagation of the Gospel strain'd their Judgement and seem'd at any time to do or say somewhat that appear'd to comply with Episcopacy our Prelatists anone Infer that such Divines were great Lovers of their Hierarchy Thus for Example they abuse the Words and Actions of Melancton but they should remember that sometimes driving the same Design some of these Divines seem'd no less to comply with the Papacy it self as appear'd at the pressing of the Interim The same end drove Melancton when in a Conference at Ausburg as Osiander relates he seem'd to yeeld somewhat of Jurisdiction to Bishops for be hop'd that if Jurisdiction were granted them they would not so much oppose the Gospel But Philip consider'd not continues Osiander that the Fox may change his hair not his Temper Melancton granted also to the Pope provided he would admit the Gospel a superiority over other Bishops founded only on humane right and yeelded for procuring of the Peace of Christendom Thus Melancton through his extream desire of Peace forc'd his own Judgement for with Luther and the rest he subscribes the Smalkaldick Articles wherein as we have heard the Scriptural Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter is most clearly asserted But what ever they say to perswade us that these or other such Divines favour them we are little oblig'd to believe it for they believe it not themselves and these of our Adversaries that speak out their mind freely tell us that all the transmarine reformed Churches are really Presbyterian It were too much I 'm sure to transcribe what D. Heylin says of this for he freely grants it and then through a whole large Folio as such bespatters with the blackest of Railings and Calumnies every one of the reformed Churches in particular No less positive is Howell who makes Calvin the first Broacher of the Presbyterian Religion And a little after Thus saith he Geneva Lake swallowed up the Episcopal See and Church Lands were made secular which was the white they levell'd at This Geneva Bird flew thence io France and hatch'd the Huguenots which make about the tenth part of that People it took wing also to Bohemia and Germany high and loe as the Palatinate the land of Hesse and the confederat Provinces of the States of Holland Yea Bellarmine being to write against Presbytry lays down in the entry as undeniable that ' t is the common doctrine of both Calvinists and Lutherans § 5. To these may be added all such as were valiant for the truths of God and stoutly oppos'd themselves to Antichrist before Luther as the Waldenses and Albigenses of whom Alphonsus de Castro relates that they deny'd any difference between Bishop and Presbyter and herein differ'd nothing from Aërius This same may be learn'd from Thuan who compares them with the English Non-conformists So far from truth was D M. when he says that these only declaimed against the corrupt Manners of the Church of Rome but never declaim'd against the subordination of one Priest unto another This same doctrine held Wicklef and his followers denying that there is any difference between Bishop and Presbyter The Waldenses and Wicklef were in this as in the rest of their Articles follow'd by J. Huss and his Adherents who also asserted that there ought to be no difference between Bishop and Presbyter or among Priests Yea so Catholick and universall hath this doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter still been that it hath all along by the Romanists been justly reck'n'd a prime doctrine of Romes Opposers Nor shall yow readily find one before Luther for of such I now speak of Truth 's Witnesses who condemn'd not all distinction between Bishop and Presbyter § 6. And even in England it self after the Reformation the famousest Bishops and lights of that Church as Hooper Latimer and others could not without great difficulty and reluctancy admitt the exercing of the Episcopal Office the using of their Priestly vestments c to be in any sense lawfull so far were they from believing a Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy But as Voëtius observes the use of it was excus'd rather than defended The first or at least the Standard-bearer among the first that either in England or any where else in the reform'd World had the brow to assert its Divine Right appear'd in the latter part of Queen Elizabeths Reign neither was he a Native of Britain but a Flemming I mean Hadrian Saravia once a Pastor in the reform'd Netherlands but as Maresius witnesses reject'd by them as being an Enemy to both their Church and State Neither was
Topicks they pretend to draw from Reason as that of Order and the like is there between them any less Consanguinity § 4. The Practice also of our Prelats both former and latter bore no small resemblance to that of the Romanists while they affected so earnestly a secular Grandour and the sullying the purity and simplicity of the Gospel with a mass of Superstition and Romish Ceremonies The affection of too many of that Party to Rome was also visible in their earnestness to get and keep a zealous Papist upon the Throne and in their melancholick and Pannick-fears at any appearance of our Relief from Slavery and imminent danger of Popery And lastly in their excessive Joy when any hope of our Delivery seem to have been crush'd and blasted All this was most legible in their Practice at the appearance of the Duke of Monmouth and the Earl of Argyle and the failing of their Designs They were no less gall'd and vex'd at the most noble and happy Design of his present Majesty praying in the chief Churches of this Kingdom that he might be sunk as a Stone in the mighty Waters And after his entry that as his Army came in one way it might be scatter'd seven ways § 5. Add to all this their either more indirect or down-right calumniating and maligning of the reform'd Churches and first Reformers placing them in the same Category with Papists Take for instance the frontispicial Lines of Nalson's Collections Like Bifrons Janus next does court your eye Rome and Geneva in Epitome They squint two ways in the main Point agree And indeed this is but their kindest dealing Neither do they then speak as they think for their Love and Charity is by many degrees greater toward the Romanists than to the reform'd Churches They will admit none of the latter to a pastoral Office if they refuse Re-Ordination but kindly receive a Romish Priest without it Of the most learn'd and godly Protestant Dissenters from them they speak most contemptuously terming them Arch-schismaticks But the Jesuit Bellarmine and Baron the Popish grand Legendarie they with greatest deference call most eminent Cardinals Yea even in the chief Churches of this Kingdom they repeated their invectives against our first Reformers and Reformation and in some Churches thereof they were not asham'd to say that our Reformation was Deformation Knox deserved knocks On the other hand not a few of 'em all along shew'd no little warmth of affection to Papists intitulating them to the same God and Heaven with themselves and asserting their neighbourhood and conjunction to be infinitely more eligible than that of these whom they-call'd Phanaticks as appears for instance in a printed Sermon of Mr Mcqueen And Heylin says that the Genevan Discipline was begotten in Rebellion born in Sedition and nursed up by Faction And indeed this Author is an Enemy so open and implacable to all the reform'd Churches that Strada Gretser Becan Campian or the like most fiery and venemous Loyolites could scarce with all their impudent slanders and infernal rage out-do yea or equal him With such stuff most of his Works and especially his History of the Presbyterians are wholly cramm'd Yea he doubts not to call both Luther and Calvin Maniches i. e. such as hold two infinite Beings or two Gods Others of the Faction as Dodwell are ready to pronounce all who dislike Diocesan Episcopacy guilty of the Sin against the Holy Ghost But the World hath now seen that the most fiery of such Zelots at length threw off the Mask and profess'd themselves Romanists as for instance L' Estrange or else which their own Dr. Burnet observes of Heylin one would think they had been secretly set on by these of the Church of Rome And so they were in their profession of Protestancy hatefull Hypocrites that they might the more easily bespatter and gore the protestant Religion through the sides of Presbytry Others of 'em are yet more down-right Atheists who if they hear the wrath of God and Hells torments denounc'd against impenitent Sinners will tell you that such a Doctctrine came from a Winter-Preacher so that if a Schytian or Groenlander who are habituated to such extream cold had heard him they would have thought he preach'd of Paradice And some call the Doctrine of Communion with God and Faith in Jesus Christ fine Fables and Stories Behold the Men who make it their chief Work to adore the Hierarchy and inveigh against Presbytry which brings to mind the saying of Tertullian that Christianity must needs be some excellent thing seeing only Nero and such Monsters were its prime Persecuters Some there are also as their own Edwards relates even of their Reverend Divines who turn all the Mosaick History concerning Adam and Eve the Serpent Paradice eating the forbidden Fruit and all the passages relating to them into Parable yea into Ridicule saying that Moses only so talked in complyance with the blockish and thick skull'd Israelites but not a syllable of truth is in all that he saith This is very strange language subjoins Edwards from a Reverend Divine who thereby destroyes the whole system of Theology and of Christianity it self And yet for such black and hainous Crimes we cann't hear that they undergoe the least degree of Censure In my Judgement saith Edwards if there be no publick Censure pass'd upon such a daring Attempt as this by a Member of our Church Athiests will have just ground to laugh at our Discipline And here in Scotland all along during their Reign how closely did they connive at such Irreligion as also at all the growth and progress then made by the active Spirit of Popery and in stead of being providers against such Pests some of our Prelats at Court prov'd Mediators in their behalf saying that there was less to be fear'd from Papists than from Phanaticks And in answer to some imputing gross Enormities to the Church of Rome said that such things were only to be ascrib'd to the Court of Rome not to the Church of Rome Add hereto the great love of not a few of 'em to the Pelagian Jesuitick or Arminian Doctrines Hypotheses clean contrary to the belief of all the reform'd Churches and more especially to that of the Church of Scotland They pretend notwithstanding as if the establishing of Prelacy were the debarring of Popery Episcopacy say they was so far from being judg'd a step to it that the ruine of the Episcopal Authority over Presbyters and the granting them exemptions from the jurisdiction of their Ordinary was the greatest advance the Roman Bishop ever made in his tyrannical Vsurpation over Churches I need not here tell so known a matter as is that of the exemption of the Regulars who being subject to their own Superiours and Generals and by them to the Pope were sent through the World in swarms and with great shows of Piety Devotion and Poverty carried away all the esteem and following from the
secular Clergy who were indeed become too secular and these were the Popes Agents and Emissaries who brought the World to receive the Mark of the Beast and wonder at her For before that time the Popes found more difficulty to carry on their Pretensions both from secular Princes and Bishops but these Regulars being warranted to Preach and Administer the Sacraments without the Bishops licence or being subject and accountable to him as they brought the Bishops under great contempt so they were the Popes chief Confidents in all their treasonable Plots against the Princes of Europe And when at the Council of Trent the Bishops of Spain being weary of the insolencies of the Regulars and of the Papal Yoke design'd to get free from it The great Mean they proposed was to get Episcopacy declared to be of Divine Right which would have struck out both the one and the other But the Papal Party fore-saw this well and opposed it with all the Artifice imaginable and Lainez the Jesuit did at large discourse against it and they carried it so that it was not permitted to be declared of Divine Right And by this judge if it be likely that the Papacy owes its rise to Episcopacy The emptiness of which discourse is apparent For First The tendency and nature of Prelacy and the Topicks whereon they Found it aiming no less at one Head over all then at one Prelat over a few Churches make evident that he touches not the Argument in hand only giving out that some time by one accident or other the humbling and depression of the Prelats prov'd the Popes exaltation Secondly Strange I 'm sure and most demonstrative must the Reasons be that make null clear Matters of Fact or perswade Men that such things have never been and 't is undeniable that the Councils and other Caballs which from time to time rais'd the Pope gradually to his present hight were all consisting of or manag'd by Bishops and if any hapen'd to spurn at his rising the Pope got still far more then a plurality to crush them and indeed 't was impossible the Pope should have risen by any other means the whole sway of Church Affairs and guidance thereof being then in the hands of Bishops wherefore if the Pope was rais'd to despotick Soveraignity whereby he might absolutely dispense of Church Affairs and trample at pleasure on the fairest mitres they only are to be blamed having themselves advanc'd him to this transcendental Preheminency Thirdly Neither are the Bishops less guilty of this the Popes exaltation upon the account of their profound sloth and negligence the Author well observes that they were become too secular and indeed they were so immers'd in Luxury and Ambition that providing they might wallow in their Lusts and obtain from the Pope a Domination over other Churches they little valued any thing else Fourthly But 't is yet more admirable how he can alledge that the Regulars brought the World to receive the Mark of the Beast as if the Bishops for this he must intimat or he says nothing had been innocent he 's too learn'd not to know that gross Papal Darkness had over-spread the World ere ever any such Exemptions were giv'n or the Regulars distinguished from Seculars 'T is true indeed that the swarms of Friers were amongst the most pestiferous Locusts the World hath been pestered withall but to lay all or the greatest share of this Guilt of exalting the Pope on their shoulders is a shrewd evidence of partiality nothing being more notour then that as the Bishops were the main Assistants and Supporters in every Innovation he decreed so they with the greatest care rigour and fury press'd them on both Clergy and People Fifthly That the wicked fraternities in the several Orders of Regulars were the Popes Agents in contriving and sometimes effecting the ruine of Kings and Princes is but too well known and evident enough yet that the Prelats were no less guilty and far more efficacious herein is no less deniable Were there no Bishops supporting the Pope in his War against the Emperour Barbarossa Did not a crew of the same Cattel join him in Dethroning Henry the IV And at a word where did ever the Pope make his impresses but he was strengthn'd by their arm and support Sixthly But tho' Episcopacy at the Council of Trent had been declar'd of Divine Right what great relief had this been either from the Papal Yoak or insolencies of the Regulars it might perhaps for the time have procur'd some more Honour to the Bishops for the Pope's Italians of other Orders but might not the Pope notwithstanding by his boundless Authority and Supremacy he pretends over all Bishops have continued to gall and oppress their Order and also send especially where the negligence of Prelats invited him his Missionaries through the World yea thus the Pope's power paramount had not once been touch'd at that Council or hurt by such a Declaration Was his infallibility ever there question'd by the Bishops Did they at all endeavour the removal of the unsupportable Burdens and Slavery the Church groan'd under And should it not have been a great benefite to the Church or diminishing the Pope's power tho' his Holiness had pleased to declare the Divine Right of their Office Seventhly But whatever it was the Bishops aim'd at in the Council of Trent I 'm not much concern'd only I would gladly know how from this their Action it follows that Bishops had never been the Men or Episcopacy one of the means whereby the Papacy had been brought into the World which is the Author's Inference and is just as one should reason thus some of Alexander's Macedonian Souldiers vex'd with his tyranny and insolence and his preferring of Strangers attempted his down-throw the like may be said of some of the Souldiers of Julius Caesar Galba Didius Julianus Maximinus and others therefore they had not contributed to the raising and absolute Supremacy of these Princes And should not such an one be reckon'd an admirable Logician And yet this Inference should be far more pardonable than the former in so much as the thing the Bishops aim'd at against the Papacy if it can be call'd any thing came infinitely short of what these Conspirators attempted upon the powers they deem'd unsupportable And by this judge if the most earnest efforts of their chiefest Authors make it in the least improbable that the Papacy owes its rise to Episcopacy and if such pitifull paralogisms proclaim not that they can really find nothing wherewith to cover Prelacy from the heavy but just imputation of being the certain introductive of Popery § 6. This odd reasoning of the Doctor minds me of another of his of his Essayes or Retorsions which is of Kin to this Argumentation May not one saith he that quarrells a standing Ministry argue on the same Grounds a Ministers Authority over the People gave the rise to the Authority Bishops pretend over Ministers and so the Minister will
the better be believ'd in this Matter viz. Jos. Walker Translator of L'arroque's History of the Eucharist who describing the Life of L'arroque which he prefixes to his Translation tells us that at the request of some Persons favouring Episcopacy he did not finish this his second Piece From these Authors it 's sufficiently evident that the issue of this Debate concerning Ignatius his Epistles was neither advantagious nor honourable to the Favourers of Episcopacy seeing by such doings they acknowledg'd their Adversary so formidable that except by powerfull Sollicitations and charms the Storm were diverted nothing less than the utter ruine of their Cause was to be feared Now by these their dealings so dishonest both first and last judge if such Men don't at once bewray extream want of candour and diffidence in their Cause And this much was meet here to be premis'd in favours of many who may have been â—â—umbled at the great Name of Ignatius and yet altogether Strangers to the thoughts of the more learn'd and ingenuous concerning the Epistles that bear his Name § 8. In this Ignatius the Patrons of the Hierarchy wonderfully please themselves and triumph as if from thence Prelacy receiv'd a most sufficient support and proof well nigh infallible of its divine Institution and that if these Epistles be his Presbytrie's undone For if we believe them Ignatius is for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or genuinness of these Epistles above the smallest suspicion of Forgery for Antiquity and Vicinity to the Apostles above possibility of being mistaken and finally for clearness in the Episcopal Cause above doubt or scruple Now seeing so far as I know little or nothing of this Subject is yet in English and the ears of many who know no other Tongue are perpetually beaten deafned with a mighty noise as if all the lofty Titles and Honours of Prelacy were adopted by a genuine and Apostolick Ignatius it shall neither be improfitable nor unacceptable if with a convenient brevity we ouerthrow the principal Pillars of so proud a Structure and render the Weapons in the estimat of our Adversaries so keen and weighty compleatly unserviceable to their Cause § 9. I therefore with no less confidence deny what they so boldly affirm I deny that the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius whether of the elder or later Editions are throughly genuine and so free of Forgeries that no chaff hath been thrown into and hudl'd amongst the grains of Wheat that may remain therein I deny that the Antiquity of the true Ignatius was able to secure him from all Lapses and Mistakes or that in his time some Churches might not be itching after several Novelties I deny finally that he is so clear and positive in the Matter of Episcopacy as to denude Presbyterians of all rational Defence should they acquiesce in his Judgement and herein join with their Adversaries who still appeal to Ignatius his Bar. But I shall not rest in Denials but shall turn them to so many contrary Positions and demonstrat each of 'em in particular Section II. The first Hypothesis viz that Ignatius is interpolated MY first Assertion therefore is that the Epistles ascrib'd to Ignatius whether of the Elder or Later Editions are not throughly genuine nor so free of Forgeries that no Chaff hath been thrown into and hudl'd amongst the grains of Wheat that may remain therein As the Writings pretended to come nearest in time to the Scriptures of the Old Testament carry notwithstanding evident Characters of a quite other time and Parent than these whereto they are falsly ascrib'd so also the Pieces that pretend greatest proximity to these of these New Testament afford no less just ground of suspicion Of this kind are Barnabas Hermas and others all which are generally either shroudly suspected as meer Forgeries or at least as not being without manifest corruption and interpolation Yea Clemens Romanus who doubtless is by far the most choice and virgin Monument of Antiquity has nothwithstanding fall'n into the like adulterous hands as the story of the Daughters of Danaus and Dirce there recounted among the Christian Sufferers makes manifest And herein Divine Providence is to be ador'd and extoll'd For had such Writings as plead for the first place after these of either Old or New Testament not under-ly'n such impeachments the great proximity thereof to the Prophetick and Apostolick Writings had certainly allur'd many to take these for Canonical whereas now they serve in some measure for a rampier and hedge about the Holy Scriptures and by the manifest corruption of the Apocryphal Writings we are taught to distinguish betwixt divine and humane Letters wherefore it should be a Paradox and a Wonder had Ignatius escap'd all such infectious Touches But there 's no ground for such admiration For that Ignatius whither of the Elder or Later Edition is not throughly genuine and so free of Forgery and Interpolation a few Examples shall make evident § 2. For in his Epistle to the Smyrneans he thus discourseth them All of you follow after the Bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father and the Presbytry as the Apostles Reverence the Deacons as the Commandment of God Let no Man without the Bishop do any of these things that ought to be done in the Church Let that Worship or Thanks be accounted lawfull which is either perform'd by the Bishop himself or permitted by him Wheresoever the Bishop appears let there also the Multitude be present even as where Christ is there is also the Catholick Church Without the Bishop it 's neither lawfull to Baptize nor Celebrate the Lord's Supper or Love-feasts but whatsoever he approves is acceptable to God And again in his Epistles to Polycarp Attend to the Bishop as God doth to you my Soul for such as obey the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons and with such let me have my Portion in God And in his Epistle to the Ephesians I write not to you as if I were of any account For altho' I be bound in the Name of Christ yet I am not perfect in Christ Jesus For now I begin to learn and speak to you as my Teachers And again in the same Epistle If I in so short a time have had such familiarity with your Bishop not Humane I say but Spiritual how much more do I pronounce you blessed being join'd together as the Church to Jesus Christ as Christ to the Father so that all things are in a harmonis Vnity Let none be deceiv'd whosoever is not within the Altar is deprived of the Bread of God For if the Prayers of one or two be of much weight how much more these put up by the Bishop and the whole Church Whosoever therefore cometh not into the same place he is proud and hath condemn'd himself for it 's written God resisteth the Proud Let us make hast therefore not to resist the Bishop to the end that we may obey God And the more silent any Man perceive the Bishop let him
fear him the more for whomsoever the Lord of the House sends to Govern it we ought to receive him as him that sends him Let us manifest that we ought to receive the Bishop as the Lord. And again in the same Epistle thus I know who I am and to whom I write I 'm condemn'd ye live in Peace I 'm in danger ye sure ye are a Passage to these who are slain in the Lord The Condisciples of Paul sanctifi'd and made Martyrs worthy blessed under whose footsteps let me be found when I enjoy God And to the Magnesians Because I was found worthy to see you in your Bishop Damas and your worthy Presbyters Bassus and Apollonius and my Fellow servant the Deacon Sotion whom let me enjoy because he 's subject to the Bishop as to the Grace of God and to the Presbyters as to the Law of Christ. And again Study to do all things in the Concord of God the Bishop presiding in the Place of God the Presbyters in the Place of the Confession of the Apostles and my most sweet Deacons having committed to their Charge the Service of Christ. And within a few lines Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father being one with him neither by himself nor by his Apostles so do ye nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters And to the Philadelphians So many as belong to God in Christ Jesus these remain with the Bishop And in the same Epistle I cryed in the midst of the Congregration I spoke with a loud voice take heed to the Bishop the Presbytry and the Deacons Some-body thought that I spoke these things foreseeing a Division but he in whom I am bound bears me witness that I had this knowledge from no Man bnt the spirit preached saying without the Bishop see ye do nothing And in his Epistle to the Trallesians Whom I Salute in fullness and an Apostolick Character And again For when ye are subject to the Bishop ye seem not to Walk according to Men but according to Jesus Christ. And in an other place of the same Epistle And in like manner let all Men reverence the Deacons as the command of Jesus Christ and the Bishop as Jesus Christ who is the Son of the Father and the Presbytry as the Council of God and Senat of the Apostles without which there is not a Church and thus I counsel you to esteem of them for I have gotten an Example of your Charity and retain the same with me in your Bishop whose very composition is a great deal of Discipline and his mansuetude Power whom I believe the very wicked reverence And afterward in the same Epistle Can I not write unto you Heavenly Things But I sear that I should thereby endammage you being but Children and forgive me least not being able to comprehend them you be strangl'd For I am not bound in every respect but can be able to know things Heavenly the Orders of Angels their Constitutions Principalities things visible and things invisible And again Thus shall it be unto you if ye be not Proud and remain unseparable from God the Bishop and Apostolick Orders And again in the same Epistle Farewell in Christ Jesus if ye be subject to the Bishop as to the command of God and in like manner to the Presbytry But I 'm weary and did never translate more of any Author with less delight or pleasure not because I 'm in the least gravell'd by what is here said concerning Bishops altho' the whole strength of what the Episcopals deduce from Ignatius be wrapt up in these Passages yea I 'm perswaded that from these very Places the Hierarchy's wounded under the fifth Rib. But because the most part of what we have quoted as also no small part of what is behind is altogether insulfe putide and more tasteless than the white of an Egg and the Reader may easily perceive by these Examples that the Spirit and genius of this Author is quite different from what can be looked for in Ignatius a prime Martyr of the primitive Church In all these Epistles 't is clear as the Noon-sun that a head-strong Passion and a furious Zeal of enslaving all Christians under an illimited and blind Obedience to all Church-men as so many Romish Holinesses did intirely possess and reign in the Author of these Epistles The Apostle indeed sometimes admonishes the Churches of the Duties and Esteem Christians should pay to Church-Officers but withall uses but rarely to handle that Subject and with the brevity and modesty that became him ascribing to them only the Titles of Watch-men and Labourers Bishops or Pastors and the like which best became the simplicity of the Gospel whereas on the other hand the pretended Ignatius so far swerves from this humble and Apostolick strain that none tho' they search the Writings of the most corrupt Ages shall be able to find any that in exaltation of the Clergy and depressing and subjecting of the Laity out did him How secure should Basilides and Martial two Spanish laps'd Bishops have been had their Flocks believed this Ignatian Doctrine who having consulted Cyprian If they might not desert these and chuse new Bishops were by him resolved in the affirmative and admonish'd to chuse other Pastors but had they believ'd this pretended Ignatius it had been with them the blackest impiety to have separated from their Bishop or attempted so to do on whatsoever account The Apostles frequently both to Pastors and Churches inculcat the diligent perusal and understanding of the Holy Scriptures as a special Duty that by them as a sure Rule all Mens Doctrines and Injunctions without any exception may be tryed but in liew hereof this their Ignatius has only Mens Persons in admiration perpetually deafening his Hearers or at least wearying his Readers with Injunctions of absolute and blind Obedience as if all and every one of his Bishops Dictats were to be receiv'd without the least Examination a Priviledge that even Christ and his Apostles tho' they might have done it never assumed to themselues but still remitted their Hearers to the Scriptures for the tryal thereof this cann't but in the estimat of all the judicious be a Fault altogether unworthy of the True Ignatius I hope that all honest Men shall give more Charity to this choice Martyr than to believe that he 's guilty of so gross Idolatry for I can call it no better and fantastick and impious doting on the person of any Man whatsoever in which unworthy Work this Author I will not say Ignatius spends no smal part of these Epistles Therefore altho' the asserting of all therein to be genuine be so far from assisting our Adversaries that their Cause is by the very Passages they alledge for its confirmation mortally wounded I can never perswade my self but they have fall'n into the wicked hands of Forgers who tainted with the common Vice of the Ages subsequent
The same saith a Ms. Author cited by Valesius of Mark the Evangelist viz. that Mark was of the Priestly Race and according to the Custome of the carnal Sacrifice carried publickly a Golden Crown as the Badge of his Priestly Dignity There is indeed nothing more certian than that the primitive Doctors who are ordinarly known by the name of Orthodox Fathers stuck with a due preciseness to the great and capital Doctrines of the Christian Religion without any swerving therefrom but it 's no less demonstrable as we have now made evident that the same Leaders and these next the Apostles of greatest Antiquity in many other things strayed exceedingly from the true Apostolick Simplicity § 8. Nothing was more frequent to them than relying upon their Vicinity to the Apostles to neglect a more accurate search of the Scriptures relate things otherways than they were transacted alledge the Apostles for Practices to which they never gave Patrociny which beside what we have said already may be sufficiently vouch'd from the Relation of Hegesippus in Eusebius The Administration saith he was undertaken by James the Lord's Brother together with the rest of the Apostles who from the time of Christ even unto our Age is sirnamed Just for there were many others of that Name beside but as for him he was sanctifi'd from the Womb neither did he ever drink Wine or strong Drink and did altogether abstain from the Flesh of any living Creature neither ever came there a Razour on his Head nor did he ever use to anoint or wash and he only of all Men had free liberty to enter into the innermost Sanctuary of the Temple for he was not wont to wear a woollen but a linnen Garment he used to enter alone into the Temple and with bended knees to pray for the People And in the sequel of this discourse he tells us that in the Martyrdome of this James he was both thrown from the pinacle of the Temple and also beaten to Death with a Fuller's Club a certain Priest one of the Sons of Rechab mention'd in Jeremiah exhorting the People to milder Counsels and that all this was done in a tumultuous way without the least appearance of any judicial Process against this Martyr But this Relation of Hegesippus is not only contrare the Holy Scripture where we are assured that the High-Priest alone entred into the Holy of Holies and that the Rechabites were not of the Priestly Race and to Josephus who informs us that James being sisted before the High-Priest's Council and by a kind of judicial Process condemn'd was stoned to Death but also a most insulfe Rapsody savouring more of a Legendary than a primitive Doctor Yet the Author thereof lived contemporary with Justin Martyr a few years only below the Apostles § 9. But of this enough and indeed with me it had been highly Sacrilegious to have said so much but buried in a perpetual silence the Escapes of these whose memory is otherways to me more precious than the ashes of Mausolus to his Artemisia and in fragrancy far surpassing the choicest of Oriental Spices did not the injustice and importunity of these who prefer the Escapes yea and Extravagancies of Men and the blemishes of these great Lights yet but terrene Lights to the unspotted Beams of the Father of all Lights compell me hereto And herein I 'm a true Son of the primitive Church whose Doctors have taught me that when the Dictats of God and these of Men whosoever they be interfer and thro' humane Corruption are set in Competition I ought to hold to the first and in comparison herewith despise the latter § 10. Add hereto that seeing Antichristianism the Mystery of Iniquity was working even in the Apostles days seeing this Defection was mysteriously promoted and seeing as experience hath proved it arrived at its hight and Antichrist was brought to his Throne by the exorbitant elevation of Clergy-men it 's much less to be wondred at if the most frequent Escapes and Lapses of the Primitive and otherways Orthodox Fathers chanced to be of this nature and tend to the establishing an unwarrantable Supremacy and Dignity which only these who were of such Repute in the Church were capable to effect And in all this I have said nothing but what has been asserted by the most approved Divines especially in their Writings against the Romanists Yea the most judicious learned Bishop Vsher is of the same mind Altho' saith he it be undeniable that the first Successors of the Apostles excell'd in Piety and Holiness it 's certain notwithstanding that they neither attained to the Vertue nor simplicity of Doctrine that wee in their Ancestors and Teachers as is well observed by Nicephorus And now judge if D. M's Romish Querie whether the Ecclesiastical Government could be changed from Parity to Prelacy as is pretended in those early Ages of the Church especially since some Apostles and several Apostolical Men surviv'd the Period sixt by some Presbyterians but no Presbyterian did ever yeeld that this Change was made during the Life of any of the Apostles for the beginning of this pretended Change and if the Change was in it self impossible then Prelacy must needs be acknowledged Apostolical I therefore turn my Assertion into a Conclusion and from what is said with confidence Inferr that the Antiquity even of the true Ignatius was not able to secure him from all Lapses and Mistakes and that in his time some Churches not only might but actually were itching after several Novelties Section IV. The third Hypothesis that there is no real Disagreement but a true Concord betwixt the Doctrine of Ignatius and that of the present Presbyterians I Now come to the third Hypothesis and assert that Ignatius is not so clear and positive in the Matter of Episcopacy as to denude Presbyterians of all rational Defence should they acquiesce in his Judgement and therein join with their Antagonists who still appeal to his Determination For all he speaks of Presbyters as distinguished from Bishops may well be mean'd of these who are call'd Ruling Elders and that there was such an Office in the primitive Church is made evident by what is commonly brought from Origen Tertullian Optatus the African Code and Augustine frequently distinguishing them from preaching Presbyters And Purpurius expresly terms them Ecclesiasticos Viros Ecclesiastick Men In vain therefore object Petavius and others that these were only Church-Wardens not properly Ecclesiasticks And indeed the Ancients not only tell us there was such an Office but also plainly assert that through pride and haughtiness of the Church Doctors this Custom was abolished as Ambrose or rather Hilary sufficiently witnesses The Synagogue saith he and afterward the Church had Elders without whose Counsel nothing was to be done in the Church which by what negligence was abolished I know not except perchance it were through the sloth or rather the pride of the Church-Doctors while they desired to carry
a particular reference to the Flock or People and seeing finally so many things spoken by Ignatius of these Bishops can agree only to Congregational Pastors I conclude that by these Ignatian Bishops not Diocesan Prelats but Pastors of particular Flocks not only may but of necessity must be understood And it 's further observable that Preaching Visiting of particular Persons and the rest of the Pastoral Work is either injoin'd unto or clearly intimated to belong to the Bishop only but nothing to the Presbyters save sitting in Council with him Now if our Opposites insist on their contrary Argument from the largeness of the Cities and from this that Ignatius still speaks but of one Bishop therein and hence conclude that he must be Diocesan the result of all must be a sharper Conflict between Ignatius and himself and so a fuller proof of the spuriousness of these Epistles it being evident from what is adduc'd that this Bishop was only a Pastor of a single Congregation yea so evident that it hath puzl'd the learn'dest of our Opposites § 4. Of this mind is Joseph Mede For speaking of these Ignatian Epistles It should seem saith he that in these first times before Dioceses were divided into those lesser and subordinate Churches we now call Parishes and Presbyters assigned to them they had not only one Altar in one Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the Company or Corporation of the Faithfull united under one Bishop or Pastor and that was in the City and Place where the Bishop had his See and Residence like as the Jews had but one Altar and one Temple for the whole Nation united under one High-Priest And yet as the Jews had their Synagogues so perhaps might they have more Oratories than one tho' their Altar were but one there namely where the Bishop was On Sunday saith Justin Martyr all that live in Towns or in the Country meet together in one Place namely as he there tells us to celebrate and participate the Holy Eucharist Why was this but because they had not many places to celebrate in And unless this were so whence came it else that a schismatical Bishop was said to set up another Altar and that a Bishop and an Altar are made Correlatives See St. Cyprian Ep. 40. 72. 73. Et de unitate Ecclesiae And thus perhaps is Ignatius also to be understood in that forequoted Passage of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Where 't is clear that Mr. Mede well perceived the thing we now plead for in Ignatius viz. that this Bishop was only the Pastor of a single Flock Indeed fear to offend his Friends or something else made him say so little as he could and something that he ought not to have said while he would parallel this Altar with that of the Jews yet he 's express enough that all subject to the Bishop met in one place for Participation of the Sacraments and consequently for hearing of the Word and moreover really acknowledgeth that Dioceses then were only what Parishes are now and if so tho' they had other Oratories 't is nothing to the purpose of our Opposits which yet his perhaps proves him afraid to assert For he knew well enough that seeing as he grants all under his Charge took their Communion with the Bishop at his Church which as every one knows was then Celebrated at least every Lord's day any other Oratories for publick Worship had been altogether unnecessary with which superfluities the Church in these early and tempestuous days was not at all acquainted In vain therefore Dr. Maurice that he may at once abuse both Mede and Ignatius tells us that Altar in the primitive sense signified not only the Communion Table but the whole Place where the Chair of the Bishop and the Seats of the Presbyters were placed and in this sense there was but one Altar in one Diocess as there is now but one Consistory as is clear from Ignatius and Usher And to be in one Altar which is Ignatius his Phrase is only to be in Communion with the Bishop And this Dr. Maurice would have to be Mede's meaning thereof But the falshood of this is not only evident from Ignatius who all along as we have seen reciprocats his Bishop with the Pastor of a particular Flock but also from Mede's express words as we have already observed from them I pass as scarce good sense Dr. Maurice his saying that Altar not only signified the Communion Table but the whole place of the Bishop's Chair c. The Dispute not being what place or thing in a Church Altar signifi'd but if thereby in Ignatius one or more places for publick Worship be meaned yea this my sense of Ignatius Doctor Wake seems to grant while he says speaking of these Ignatian times that none officiated but either the Bishop himself or he who was appointed or allow'd by him and that they had in every such Place of their Assembling one Table or Altar at which they performed this Service We have heard already Mede rightly observing out of Ignatius that the Altar or Communion Table was only at the Bishop's Residence and where he officiated And we see from Dr. Wake that in every place of solemn Worship they had an Altar or Communion Table The Conclusion then is which we also already heard Mede acknowledging that there were then no fewer Bishops than Places of publick Worship which is the Truth and what we conclude from Ignatius And to these add the words of one who is neither unskillfull in these Matters nor yet Partial in favours of Presbytry In the beginning saith he the Bishops whole Charge was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the strain of Ignatius his Epistles especially that to Smyrna it would appear that there was but one Church at least but one Place where there was one Altar and Communion in each of these Parishes for he saith there was one Bishop one Church and one Altar And now judge of the symphony of this Assertion with the Principles of the Author or how he could averr that if these Epistles be Genuine the Cause of Presbytry will be undone But of all things most strange and unaccountable is Dr. Pearson's Conduct in the Dispute who with indefatigable pains and vast learning wrote his Defence of Ignatius to the end as he pretends he might well nigh infallibly establish a Diocesan Bishop and yet has proved so far from hitting the white at which he ultimately levell'd that on supposition of the sufficiency of his Vindiciae he most sufficiently demonstrats the Identity of Bishop and parochial Pastor during the time of Ignatius and thus inavoidably ruines what he most earnestly intended to repair And now behold the vast Fabrick and Engine wherewith they threaten the utter Ruine of Presbytry turning upon and shattering to pieces their Dio cesan Hierarchy Nec enim Lex justior ulla Quam necis Artifices
arte perire sua Section V. The Objections they pretend to bring from Scripture against the Doctrine now deduc'd from Ignatius removed ANd indeed Ignatius is encompast with so thick a Cloud of Witnesses who not only deny all support to but give most evident Depositions against the Diocesan Prelat that his Testimony in favours thereof should be a firm demonstration of the Bastardy of these Epistles The time of the Apostles was not far above that of Ignatius Now if we consult these we shall not only find our Adversaries destitute of their Suffrages but also overwhelm'd with their plain Testimonies against the Hierarchy 'T is true they alledge several things out of the Apostolick Writings for establishing their Cause as that Timothy and Titus as also the Angels of the Asiatick Caeurches were Diocesan Bishops The grounds wherein tâ—ey establish the Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus are that they are enjoined to Ordain Elders which in after Ages was the peculiar Province of Diocesan Bishops and that in the Postscrâ—pts of these Epistles they are both called Bishops But their later Topick is by the profound silence of the ancient Commentaries and many other tokens of Forgery and Novelty so baffl'd that Prelacy's present Agents and amongst others D. M are so wise as to suppress it And yet D. M. adventures to conclude Timothy his being made Bishop of Ephesus from Acts 20. 3 4 5. which Inference few I think beside the Author can gather compared with 1 Tim. 1. 3. I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other Doctrine From which even tho' it be compared with the other Scripture any Man in his Wit would much rather with Chrysostome inferr the very contrary and conclude that Timothy's stay at Ephesus was only temporary to expede the Business there mention'd but not to fix therein But saith he 1 Tim. 3. 14. 15. These things I write unto thee c. plainly insinuat his particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus But the many Scriptures informing us of Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus perswade that there was no such Relation neither does this place in the least insinuat it but only that Timothy if not sent for was to stay till Paul's return wherefore he begs the Question while he tells us that after he was in a particular manner established Bishop of the Church of Ephesus he might wait upon Paul Moreover this was an odd Attendance that scarce ever suffer'd Timothy to stay with his Flock and this shift too like that of the Romanists who in Answer to the Argument from Scripture-silence against Peter's being Bishop of Rome tell us that he was frequently abroad But here we have not only Scripture-silence but Scripture Testimony shewing Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus He essays also to bring Timothy's Episcopal Power and particular Relation to Ephesus from 1 Tim. 5. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 1. and 1 Tim. 5. 21. And that this was not temporary or transient but successive and perpetual he would prove from 1 Tim. 6. 13. 20. and 2 Tim. 2. 2. and adds that his Adversaries grant that the Power he pleads for to Bishops was exercised by Timothy But as for the particular Relation he speaks of he should have proved it seeing he knows it will not be granted except he bring more than the bare recitall of the places from which his fancy collects it and without such a particular Relation the Power Timothy exercised be what it will makes nothing for his purpose seeing it might be lodged in him alone as an Evangelist and thus most of his postulata prove useless Yet I will handle them particularly of which the first two are that the Power which Timothy exercised was in it self lawfull and that he practised it in Ephesus And 't is true none denies it but what then untill he first prove Timothy's particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus The third and fourth are that it was committed to him alone and not to a Colledge of Presbyters acting among themselves in Parity And that there 's no mention of any spiritual Power lodged in a Colledge of Presbyters to which Timothy was accountable But Willet an approved Divine of the Church of England shall answer for us Neither saith he can it be gathered by these words of the Apostle lay Hands suddenly upon no Man c. That Timothy had this sole Power in himself for the Apostle would not give that to him which he did not take to himself who associated unto him the rest of the Presbytry in Ordaining of Timothy I add that there 's no less mention of a spiritual Power in a Colledge of Presbyters c. than of Timothy's being fixed Bishop of Ephesus Hence his 5. postulatum viz. That the great and most eminent Branches of the Episcopal Power were lodged in Timothy ' s Person the ordination of such as were admitted unto the sacred Function the care of Widows the Censuring of Elders and his autoritative preventing of Heresies becomes unserviceable His VI is that this Authority was not in it self of temporary duration transient or extraordinary but such as the constant Necessities of the Church do make necessary in all Ages for he was commanded to commit it unto faithfull Men such as should be able to teach others and if there be nothing in it extraordinary why do they say that in the discharging of an ordinary trust there was need of an extraordinary Officer But First he corrupts the Apostles words 2 Tim. 2. 2. substituting it in stead of them that thereby he may force the Text to speak of a Power equal to that of Timothy which was to be derived unto succeeding Teachers when yet it plainly speaks of the Transmission of the Doctrine or things Timothy had heard and others were to teach but nothing of an equality of Timothy's Power to be derived in solidum to every subsequent Bishop or Teacher Now except this be proved D. M. saith nothing Yea Hammond expresly contradicts him Appoint them saith he as Bishops under thee Moreover Christ committed the things Paul here speaks of to his Apostles yet will D. M. say their Power was equall to Christ's Secondly In this his last postulatum there appears a strange kind of reasoning viz. the Things or Actions wherein Timothy and Titus were employed are perpetual and ordinary therefore they were not extraordinary Officers just as if one would Reason It 's ordinary for a skillfull Physitian to relieve a Febricitant therefore our Saviour relieving Peter's Wife's Mother was no extraordinary Physitian For their Method and Way of performing these Actions was extraordinary and temporary they having no special Power over or Relation to any one particular Congregation but such a Power and Relation as equally were extended over all the places whither they were sent Moreover others of their Actions and these which were properly Evangelistick were extraordinary such
as that of Planting the first Christian Churches Lastly I appeal to all Protestants if his ascribing to every Bishop a Power of authorative preventing of Heresies i. e. a Power of making Canons that lean only on the Bishop's own Will and which he 's not oblig'd to prove from Scripture otherwise every Minister of Christ hath a Power and Authority by publick preaching and reasoning from the Word of God to prevent and overthrow Heresies and so D. M. speaks not to the purpose hath not a rank savour of what is no better than the grossest of Popery The Romanists give such an authoritative Power to one Pope but from a perswasion of his Infallibility this Author will have it unto every single Bishop tho' as yet he has not adventured to ascribe to each of 'em such a Priviledge and to explain if need were what he means by this authoritative preventing of Heresies § 2. Look but on page 95 et seq and you shall see him make every Bishop an Apostle in the strickest sense and priviledg'd with no less Power over the Church-Officers and People in his Diocess than an Apostle ever had or could exercise viz. a Power to Govern the Churches to give Rules and Directions to inflict Censures to communicat his Authority to others to hear Complaints to decide Controversies to Confer the Holy Ghost viz. the Gifts of the Holy Ghost that must needs attend the authoritative Ministry of holy Things and therefore that the Office of an Apostle is altogether ordinary and permanent The Apostolical Office saith he being essentially no other than this the ordinary Necessities of the Church require that it should continue till the second coming of our Saviour But the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost the Power of Miracles of Languages were only extriasick Advantages and not peculiar to the Apostles And to affirm otherwayes and say that the proper Apostolick Office is now ceased he makes proper to Presbyterians and Socinians But so far is he from speaking Truth here that the ceasing of the proper Apostolick Office and Power is asserted by the Body of Protestants even Episcopal no less than Presbyterian in opposition to the Jesuites his Masters who as he doth to his Diocesan Bishop arrogate an Apostolick Office and Power to their Pope Spanhem F. a fervent Apologist of the Hierarchicks assigns many Characters of the Apostolate as an extraordinary Calling either immediat or equivalent thereto Infallibility of Doctrine transcendent Efficacy and energy in Preaching admirable success therein the Gift of Tongues and of working Miracles all which things altho' some of 'em might have been in some measure in others were saith he in a more Divine and Eminent manner in the Apostles And he affirms that every one who was endued with a true and proper Apostolick Power had and could give such visible Proofs and ocular Demonstrations thereof and then concludes against the Pope thus let the Pope now descend from the Capitol let him as did the Apostles declare that he has the Gift of Tongues Divinely infused let him bring visibly the Gifts of the Holy Ghost from Heav'n let him work like the Apostles such illustrious Miracles and then we shall yeeld that he has Apostolick Authority and so shall we to the Diocesans when they adduce these Proofs of their Apostleship He asserts that they 're much deceiv'd who would bring the Apostles down to the Order of particular Bishops and demonstrats against Hammond that they were not at all call'd Apostles on the account that they were Bishops consequently that Apostle and Bishop are quite different things In short the very Sum and Substance of Spanhemius his Disputation is nothing save an Approbation and Confirmation of that common Sentiment of Protestants express'd by Beza The Churches saith he being once constitute this Office of the Apostle-ship was of necessity taken away he is a Tyranne therefore who does now profess himself an Apostle in the Church by Succession And by this one Observation viz. that whereever the proper Apostolick Power was they could give ocular and undeniable Proofs and Demonstrations thereof the Protestants for ever silence and baffle the Jesuites and their Progeny D. M. and such Companions ascribing a Power properly Apostolick to their Roman Antichrist and their Diocesan Prelats and fully remove all thier Quibbles on this Theme as Dr. Scot's Quirk the Substance whereof is there 's no mention in Scripture of the taking away of this Apostolick Office and therefore it yet remains But I forgot that for the permanency of a Power properly Apostolick D. M. cites Mat. 28. 20. And lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World As if not to mention Protestants even the more ingenuous Romanists as Lyra did not understand this place of Christ's assistance given to all Doctors of the Church without any Discrimination Moreover all his Exceptions and pretended Instances to the contrary are impertinent and severals of 'em false in matter of Fact as for Example nor is it necessary saith D. M. to make up an Apostle that he be immediatly call'd to the Apostolate by our Saviour for Matthias was not immediatly ordain'd by our Saviour but by the Apostles But Spanhemius tells these Jesuites that the Lot that fell upon Matthias was really the voice of God no less than was that of the Division of Canaan of the Scape-goat c. And indeed as I said that the Office and Power properly Apostolick is long since ceas'd is the common Doctine of Protestants as Calvine None saith Sadeel against Turrian the Jesuite but he who is an Ignoramus in Divinity will confound an Apostle with a Bishop I assert therefore that God's immediat calling and choosing to preach the Gospel is essential to the Office of an Apostle But these say you were Presbyterians I deny 't not however they were then pleading the common Cause of Protestants and were never opposed herein by any save down-fight Papists only till that now we have to do with real Jesuites who yet mask themselves and will not acknowledge the name In the mean while I do not think they 'll say Spanhemius Fil. is a Presbyterian nor yet Nilus ' Bishop of Thessalonica who saith the Pope is not an Apostle the Apostles did not ordain other Apostles but only Doctors and Teachers Of this mind is also Willet Bellarmine saith Whitaker seems to say the Pope succeeds Peter in his Apostle-ship but none can have Apostolick Power but he who is properly and truly an Apostle for the Power and Office of an Apostle constitute an Apostle But that the Pope is neither truly nor properly an Apostle is prov'd by these Arguments whereby Paul proves his Apostle-ship as that he was not call'd by Men c. Gal. 1. 1 and 12. and Ephes. 3. 3. and 5. 1 Cor. 9. 1. Altho' saith Sutlivius the ancient Bishop of Rome succeeded Peter in Doctrine
and the Chair yet they succeeded him not in his Apostle-ship but the latter Bishops in neither c. And Lightfoot a renown'd Divine of the Church of England proves that the Apostle-ship was an Order for ever unimitable in the Church The Apostles saith the same Author could not ordain as Apostle by Imposition of Hands as they could ordain Elders but they are forced to use a Divine Lot which was as the immediate Hand of Christ imposed on him that was to be ordained that Opinion took little notice of this circumstance that hath placed Bishops in the Place of the Apostles by a common and successive Ordination Dr. Barrow whose Works are publish'd by Bishop Tillotson and therefore are to be lookt on as his is copious on this Subject Apostles also saith he did Govern in an absolute manner according to Discretion as being guided by infallible assistance to the which they might on occasion appeal and affirm it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicat it They did indeed appoint standing Pastors and Teachers in each Church they did assume fellow Labourers or Assistents in the Work of Preaching and Governance but they did not constitute Apostles equal to themselves in Authority Priviledges or Gifts for who knoweth not saith St. Austine that Principate of Apostle-ship to be preferr'd before any Episcopacy And the Bishops saith Bellarmine have no part of the true Apostolical Authority And now judge of the Spirit of these Men who are glad most falsly to brand these famous Bishops and others the most eminent Doctors of that Perswasion as being guilty of the most abominable Crime of Socinianism providing they can thereby bespatter and make odious the Presbyterians Judge also of D. M's Query whether the Apostolical Power as to it 's permanent necessary and essential Branches was not in its nature Perpetual and Successive and by them transmitted in solidum as they receiv'd it from our blessed Saviour to single Successors in particular Sees and not to a Colledge of Presbytsrs in the modern Notion As to the last part of his Query and his Presbyters in the modern Notion I know none such if 't be not these of the Hierarchicks their half Ministers for which there is no ground in Scripture And accordingly it's certain that the Apostles left the managing of the Church to neither Bishops nor Presbyters in his sense both of them being Chimera's but to Colledges of Bishops who are also Presbyters both being one in Scripture during the Apostolick age But tho' we should grant them all the Query seeks supposing which all the Ancients affirm the equality of all Bishops who at the beginning were reciprocated with Congregations he 's yet but where he was and has really done nothing for the establishing of his Hierarchy Judge lastly of that doughty Argument of the Papists and our Hierarchicks for Prelacy to wit that Bishops succeed to the Apostles and Presbyters to the 70 Disciples which has been generally reckon'd by Protestants among Rome's dotages and as such refuted in their Popish Controversies and to name no others by Iunius and Willet who answers that not only Bishops but all faithfull Pastors are the Apostles Successors and that even according to the Pope's Decrees not Bishop but Priests succeed the Apostles and Deacons not Presbyters succeed the 70 Disciples And now to go on with D. M. and his Fellows all their cavilling to make Timothy and Titus Hierarchick Bishops is but the product of a late Popish Dream For the Fathers when they so called them or the Apostles mean'd not of Bishops in this sense § 3. Wherefore Willet Answers that it is most like Timothy had the Place and Calling of an Evangelist and that the Calling of Evangelists and Bishops which were Pastors was diverse This Answer which so approv'd a Divine of the Church of England gave the Papists D. M. calls a ridiculous subterfuge For saith he the Work of an Evangelist has nothing in it opposite to or inconsistent with the Dignity of a Bishop c. A most disingenuous tergiversation and sliding from the Office of the opponent or probant to that of the defendent seeing this was one of his special Scripture-Arguments whereby to establish his Hierarchy and it 's sure that if Timothy and Titus might do what they did under another Notion and Capacity than that of a Diocesan Prelate his Argument goes to wrack As does also his perversion of 2 Tim. 4 5. for he insinuats that from Timothy's being injoined to do the Work of an Evangelist it will no more follow that he deserved the Name than Daniel's saying Ch. 8. 27. that he did the King's Work will prove him a King But had he ever considered the rest of the Epistle the context of the place and the Signification and Notation of the Word Evangelist he had clearly seen that the Apostle so adapts this Work of an Evangelist to Timothy that the Name and Character properly belongs unto him He adds That any who now convert Jews or Pagans are as properly Evangelists as any so called in the primitive Church and thus insinuats that Evangelists such as Timothy and Titus were no extraordinary Officers which except a few Novelists wedded to their Fancies is condemned by all Men. § 4. And that there was such a Function by which some in the days of the Apostles were raised far above the rank of ordinar Pastors or Doctors and placed in the very next degree to the Apostles themselves whose Office was mostly ambulatory going from Church to Church in the exercise thereof is in part intimated by Sedulius and Theodoret and others upon Ephes. 4. 11. but more fully by Eusebius who informs us that even after the Death of the Apostles divers remained who were in a far higher rank than the rest of their Successors who being saith he the admirable and divine Disciples of so great Men built up the Churches the Apostles had founded promoving the preaching of the Gospel and sowing Seed of the Kingdom of Heaven far and wide thro' the whole World for many of these Disciples that were yet living whose Minds the Divine Word had inflammed with a vehement desire of Wisdom fullfilling our Saviour's Command and dividing their Goods among the Poor and thus leaving their Country exercised the Office of Evangelists among these who had not yet heard the Doctrine of Faith by most diligent preaching of the Gospel and furnishing their Hearers with the Holy Scriptures these so soon as in any remot and barbarous Country they had laid the Foundations of Faith and ordained Pastors and had committed to these Pastors the care of this New Plantation being content therewith and accompanied by the Grace and Power of God hast'ned to other Countries for even to that time the Divine Power of God's Spirit wrought Miracles by these Men so that at the first hearing of the Gospel
some whole Peoples readily imbraced the Christian Religion Behold Reader how plainly and fully Eusebius relates the thing we plead for viz. that those Officers were altogether extraordinary unfixed and temporary § 5. Wretch'dly therefore does D. M. castrat this full and plain discourse while he only says that an Evangelist in the Notion of Eusebius was a Person that preached the Gospel to those that had not heard of it or resisted it and thus dissembles the whole matter in question which Eusebius clearly determines And according to this Relation of Eusebius 2 Timothy 4. 5. he is enjoined to do the Work of an Evangelist and never made a long stay at one place for even after the time of his pretended Ordination to the Bishoprick we find him not rarely with the Apostle Paul as his Attendant or Fellow Labourer which not only his joint Superscriptions to the second Epistle to the Corinthians and these to the Philippians Colossians both his Epistles to the Thessalonians and to Philemon but also the long Journeys and Peregrinations wherein we find Timothy still imployed irrefragably make manifest for after he is supposed to have been Bishop of Ephesus he was accompanying Paul in his Voyages Acts 20. 4. and was with him Prisoner at Rome as is probable from Philippians 1. and 1. Heb. 13. 23. as also frequently imployed in long Voyages to several Churches and that in Businesses which could not be expeded in a day as is evident 1 Cor. 4. 17. 1 Cor. 16. 10. Philip. 2. 19. Heb. 13. 23. 2 Tim. 4. 21. So that if he was Bishop of Ephesus he will prove a sufficient Patern for non-residence Most of which things may be supposed of Titus whose frequent long Journeys are mentioned by the same Apostle Yea they have just as good ground in 2 Tim. 4. 10. to fix Titus his Episcopal Chair in Dalmatia which was the Fancy of Aquinas and others as they can ever shew for their dream of its being among the Cretians And indeed the very Phrase from which they gather the Prelacy of Titus as we have already observed of Timothy gives real ground to conclude the contrary For this Cause saith he I left thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in Order the things that are wanting and ordain Elders From which place any ingenuous Man shall be compell'd to inferr that Titus was only left there to supply some present want and to return again much rather than that he was the fixed Arch-Bishop of Crete § 6. It 's amazing then that in defiance of so clear Antiquity yea and so clear and full Scripture evidence some dare to transform Timothy and Titus unto ordinary and fixed Officers why they see that among the ordinary and fixed Church-Officers they cannot find what they covet the Scriptures making Bishop Pastor and Presbyter one and the same but yeelding no place to their Diocesan Bishop a Lord and Ruler over other Bishops or Pastors They are compell'd therefore in imitation of the Romanists who degrade the Apostle to find the Bishop of Rome and Antioch just so to handle the Evangelists that Peter be not alone but may find other degraded Companions if he shall by chance in his Journey from one of his Sees to another visit Crete or Ephesus § 7. But more strange is that most precarious Assertion of D. M. that Philip the Evangelist had no Power of Ordination But it 's yet more admirable how to establish Timothy a Bishop he can adduce the eleventh Act of the Council of Chalcedon surely had he read the learned Stillingfleet who hath for ever baffl'd them in this their Allegation he had blush'd at the very mentioning thereof And we learn from Hierome that Titus after he had given some Instruction to the Churches of Cret◠was to return again to the Apostles and to be succeeded by Artemas or Tychicus for comforting of these Churches in the absence of the Apostle Judge Reader if Hierome thought Titus was fix'd Arch-Bishop of Crete It 's questionable saith Chrysostome if the Apostle had then constituted Timothy Bishop there for he saith that thou might'st charge some that they teach no other Doctrine Thus he without a word more for solution of this his Doubt Judge therefore if from the very Scripture whereon alone they would found Timothy's being Bishop of Ephesus he really concludes not the quite contrary Doctrine It 's doubtfull saith a most earnest Prelatist Salmeron the Jesuit if Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus for altho' he preach'd and ordain'd some to the Ministry there it follows not that he was the Bishop of that place for Paul preach'd also there above two years and absolv'd the Penitents and yet he was no Bishop Add that now and then the Apostle call'd him away unto himself and sent him from Rome to the Hebrews with his Epistle And in the second Epistle he commands him to come to him shortly Timothy was also an Evangelist of that Order Eph. 4. He gave some Apostles c. So that Dorotheus says in his Synopsis that Timothy preach'd through all Grecee but he stayed at Ephesus not to be Bishop but that in the constitute Church of Ephesus he might oppose the false Apostles c. It appears therefore that he was more than a Bishop altho' for a time he preached in that City as a Pastor and ordain'd some to the Ministry Hence it is that some call him Bishop of Ephesus And to conclude this matter the celebrated Stilling fleet ingenuously grants that Timothy and Titus were no fixed Bishops or Pastors but Evangelists notwithstanding saith he all the opposition made against it as will appear to any who will take an impartial survey of the Arguments on both sides § 8. As for the Apocalyptick Angels tho' with Beza we should affirm that by one of 'em one single Moderator is mean'd we yeeld them nothing but e contra cut the sinews of their Argument With this D. M. ingages not only he calls the Alterableness of the Moderator which Beza holds as defensible ridiculous which is said without proof and tho' it were so touches not the marrow of our Answer But they shall find their Foundation yet weaker for such a structure so soon as they shall with attention read over the contexts of the place now in Controversie The seven Stars which are the seven Angels are said to be held in God's right hand whereby without peradventure is signified the great care our Lord had of the Pastors of these Flocks in order to the promoting of the great Gospel-Design the gaining of Souls to himself But Bishops I mean Diocesans as such and distinct from other Pastors are not at all Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments by whom mostly this Gospel-design is effected Moreover how few should they be to whom this care was extended and how small comfort should the bulk of the Labourers in the Word and Doctrine be able to reap from the
and defended it against the Jesuite Petavius whom D. M. would patronize against both Protestants and Fathers The second of the Homilies ascribed to Augustine in Apocalypsin informs us that under the name of Angel not only Bishops but other Church-Rulers are likewise understood And again seeing Angel signifies a Messenger whosoever whether Bishop Presbyter or Laick frequently speaketh of God and declares how we may obtain eternal Life deservedly gets the name of an Angel of God And Aretas saith he calleth the Church it self the Angel And Primasius saith by these Angels of the Church are to be understood the Guides and Rectors of the People who ruling in particular Churches Preach the Word of Life to all Men for the name of Angel signifies a Messenger And again both Church and Angel is comprehended under the Person of the Angel And thus their main Scripture-Argument even the Fathers being Judges goes to ruine § 13. Yea the more sagacious of our Adversaries well perceive that neither this Scripture nor any other supports their Doctrine Wherefore Petavius never attempts to bring his Proofs from Scripture but only from Ecclesiastick Traditions Add hereto the words of Dr. Burnet As for the Notion saith he of the distinct Offices of Bishop and Presbyter I confess it is not so clear to me and therefore since I look upon the Sacramental Actions as the highest of sacred Performances I cannot but acknowledge these who are empower'd for them must be of the highest Office in the Church So I do not alledge a Bishop to be a distinct Office from a Presbyter but a different degree in the same Office to whom for Order and Vnities sake the chief inspection and care of Ecclesiastical Matters ought to be referred and who shall have Authority to curb the Insolencies of some factious and turbulent Spirits His Work should be to feed the Flock by the Word and Sacraments as well as other Presbyters and especially to try and ordain Entrants and to Oversee Direct and Admonish such as bear Office And I more willingly incline to believe Bishops and Presbyters to be the several degrees of the same Office since the names of Bishop and Presbyter are used for the same thing in Scripture and are also used promiscuously by the Writers of the two first Centuries Where he plainly contradicts Dr. Pearson who in favour of his Ignatius largely pleads for the accurat distinction of Bishop and Presbyter in the second Century denies Bishop and Presbyter to be distinct Orders and finally acknowledges that in the chiefest parts of the Ministerial Function they are equal and so really denudes the Bishop of all the degree he left him But more clearly elsewhere I acknowledged saith he Bishop and Presbyter to be one and the same Office and so I plead for no New Office-Bearers in the Church Next in our second Conference the Power giv'n to Church-men was proved to be double The first Branch of it is their Authority to publish the Gospel to manage the Worship and to dispence the Sacraments And this is all that is of Divine-Right in the Ministry in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal sharers both being vested with this Power But beside this the Church claims a Power of Jurisdiction of making Rules for Discipline and of appointing and executing the same all which is indeed suitable to the common Laws of Societies and to the general Rules of Scripture but hath no positive Warrant from any Scripture-Precept And all these Constitutions of Churches into Synods and the Canons of Discipline taking their rise from the Divisions of the World into the several Provinces and beginning in the end of the second and beginning of the third Century do clearly shew they can be derived from no Divine Original and so were as to their particular Form but of humane Constitution therefore as to the management of this Jurisdiction it is in the Churches Power to cast it in what mould she will A Presbyter acknowledges even Cornelius à Lapide is equal to a Bishop in the chiefest Order which is the Order of the Priest-hood § 14. To which add the Judgement of Dr. Hammond a Man so distemper'd with extreme Passion for the Hierarchy that he makes him that sat on the Throne Rev. 4. God the Father and the four and twenty Elders with their Golden Crowns an Image and Representation of the Metropolitan Bishop of Hierusalem and the four and twenty Bishops of Judaea in Council for Golden Crowns or Mitres he makes the Characters of the Episcopal Dignity Yet even he asserts on Acts 11. 30. Philip. 1. 1. that the Title of Presbyter in Scripture times belonged principally if not only to Bishops There being saith he no evidence that any of that second Order were then instituted but Bishops only and Deacons This he at large confirms and so really overthrows Prelacy when he would fainest establish it joining with the Presbyterians in their grand Antiprelatick Principle viz. that simple Presbyter as the Hierarchicks phrase it without Power of Ordination or Government or a distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter is a meer stranger without all Foundation in the Holy Scriptures From all which 't is clear that these Bishops or which is all one preaching Presbyters in Scriptures and during the Apostolick age were nothing save Pastors of particular Congregations Section VI. Our meaning of Ignatius confirmed from the Writings of the Apostles his immediat Ancestors MOreover nothing can be more clear for the Idenity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter than that known Scripture Acts 20. 17 28. They Answer that the Bishops of Asia not the Pastors of Ephesus were by Paul sent for which some would support from the 18 ver From the first day that I came into Asia c. But since as is clear ch 19. verse 10. from his coming into Asia he had been most in Ephesus he might truly say so much tho' the Ephesians only had been present but suppose he spoke to others beside we are at no loss the Question is if he gave not tho' amongst others the Title of Overseers or Bishops to these he sent for verse 17. And if these were not the Elders of Ephesus They yet object the words of Irenaeus viz. That Paul called together to Miletum the Bishops and Presbyters of Ephesus and the neighbouring Towns But as for his seeming here to distinguish Bishops from Presbyters this Scripture where they get both Names and which Iraeneus had then in his view and his frequent promiscuous using of these Names perswade me that he only respected the 17 and 28 verses and so took Bishop and Presbyter Synonimically for one and the same His adding of the neighbour Towns to Ephesus might flow from his inadvertency whereat no attentive Reader of Irenaeus will marvel and yet this is as likely to have crept into the Version for the Original of Iraeneus we have not because these Elders their belonging to
Ephesus alone is not only so clear from the 17 verse that the repeating of the word Ephesus would really prove a redundancy wherefore the Syriack omits it in the former part of the verse and expresses it in the latter and called for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus but also all the Ancients either affirm as Hierome or suppose that these Elders belonged only to Ephesus which even Dr. Maurice yeelds against Dr. Hammond and says that then properly speaking there might not be a Bishop amongst them all for they are Presbyters belonging not to several Congregations but to one Church and might have a Bishop But not only the promiscuous attributing to them the Names Bishop and Presbyter their being and that without any insinuation of their Subjection to a superiour Bishop enjoin'd by the Apostle to Oversee and feed the Flock and finally the very Repetition of this Fiction of their Hierarchy in the Apostolick Age sufficiently refute it Who continues he the Ancients thought was Timothy And thus all resolves into the fictitious Episcopacy of Timothy already overthrown Now 't is observable how they contradict one another and by halfs acknowledge to be false all they plead for for some as Dr. Maurice perceiving that the Ancients affirm and the Scriptures proclaim all these Elders to belong to the Church or City of Ephesus acknowledge these could be no Diocesan Bishops Others as Dr. Hammond in locum alibi and Petavius seeing that these are not only dignifi'd with the name of Bishop but intrusted with the care of the Flock and that without Paul ' s mentioning of any superiour Bishop when if ever there was ground to have mention'd him yeeld that of necessity these Elders must be Bishops or more than simple Presbyters Whence is all this Contradiction and Confusion of Tongues but from the force of Truth before which Men must either bow or break and be compell'd tho' after never so much interpolation and disguise to express what they would fainest conceal The matter is their Diocesan Bishop their simple Presbyter their distinction between Bishop and Presbyter are meer Antiscriptural Figments in the sustaining of which against this and the like Scriptures they are obliged to confront one another and in the throng of their blunderings intirely yeeld the Controversie § 2. The same line of confusion runs along their Answer to Philip. 1. 1. with the Bishops and Deacons c. whence 't is clear that there were in one City many Bishops who were no other thing than Presbyters and that these were no distinct Orders the Deacons being immediatly subjoin'd these were the Bishops of the several Cities of Macedonia under Philippi the Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond in locum 't is denied by Dr. Maurice I could never find reason saith he to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Philippi was a Metropolis because a Colonie saith Dr. Hammond but that this will not follow is acknowledged by Dr. Maurice Thus they are still by the ears But saith Dr. Hammond the Apostle might retain the Episcopal Power in his own hands and tho' absent might exercise it by Letters but they can give no ground why the like may not be said of the Apostle in reference to the rest of the Churches and so Timothy and Titus shall be dethron'd and our Adversaries endeavouring to Answer one of our Arguments loss two of their own yea all of them for it being no less presumable that John would keep the Episcopal Power over the Churches of Asia in his own hand then that Paul kept that of Philippi there shall be no ground nor colour to Metamorphose the Apocalyptick Angels into Diocesan Bishops Or it 's possible continues Dr. H. that then the Bishop's Chair was vacant But if so and a Diocesan so necessary as they pretend without peradventure the Apostle had not only mention'd it but also spent some part of his Epistle in directing and giving them Rules in order to their choice of a fit Successour Or the Bishop saith he might be absent and Epaphroditus by the Ancients judged Bishop of Philippi appears to have been then with Paul But this Dream of Epaphroditus his being Bishop of Philippi the Doctor in that very place condemns and overthrows and so frees us of further trouble about it § 3. Yea in none of these Answers does Dr. H. rest but as is said in this pretext that Philippi was a Metropolis over many subject Bishops leaning mainly on Acts 16. 12. whose Arguments were examined by Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Clerkson Dr. Maurice tho' a grand Enemy to Hammond's grand Principle undertakes notwithstanding the defence of some of these Arguments against the latter but medles not with the former and saith that Beza ' s Manuscript hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath also the Syriack and Arabick But OEcumenius and Theophilact and even Chrysostome yea and the received Greek Copy which Translators generally follow read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But seeing as the learned Stillingfleet demonstrats Philippi was not then a Metropolis in the Civil sence which is the Foundation of all their Structure 't is impossible that it can be call'd by Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first in respect of Dignity but only either must be mean'd as Luke may well be understood that it was the first Colony they mett with coming from Samothrace or in respect of Situation it being scarce within the Bounds of the proper Macedonia but on the Thracian side of the River Strymon the Boundary between Thrace and Macedonia yet it might be nearer to the proper Macedonia than was Neapolis and therefore is rather to be reckon'd a part of that Country than Neapolis could be wherefore on both at least certainly on one of these accounts appears the nullity of Dr. Maurice his Answer while he says that not Philippi but Neapolis was the first in Situation Of the same kidney is his saying that Philippi might be more considerable in Luke ' s time than in the time of P. Aemilius seeing this is a mean begging of the Question for he brings nothing from any Records which a Matter of this kind requires to make in the least probable the growth of Philippi between the time of Aemilius and Luke and Chrysostome speaking of Luke's time tells us that it was no great City Moreover Dr. Stilling fleet ex abundanti clearly shews through the several periods of time that Philippi was of no greater Dignity in the time of Luke than in the time of P. Aemilius Dr. Maurice adds as a proof of Philippi's Metropolitan-ship in Luke's time that the Bishop of Philippi is mention'd as Metropolitan in Liberatus the Council of Ephesus Sedulius and in an old Notitia To which I Answer with Dr. Stillingfleet in the like Case But what validity there is in such Subscriptions or Allegations in the latter end of the
in Philippi there had been a Bishop superior to the plurality of Bishops saluted by the Apostle Yet on Acts 20. and 17. gives this Paraphrase Because many are ignorant of the Manner especially of the New Testament whereby Bishops are call'd Presbyters and Presbyters Bishops This much may be observed both from this place and from the Epistle to Titus and to the Philippians and 1. to Timothy From this place therefore of the Acts we may arrive at the certainty of this Matter For thus it is written from Miletus he sent and called the Elders of the Church it is not said the Bishops And afterwards he subjoins over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Feed or Rule the Church and from the Epistle to Titus that thou mightest appoint Elders in every City as I ordain'd thee and from the Epistle to the Philippians to all that are at Philippi with Bishops and Deacons and as I believe the same may be gather'd from the frist to Timothy If any Man saith he desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good Work a Bishop therefore should be blameless And shortly after let not a Widow be taken into the number under threescore years which the Transcriber of OEcumenius hath out of negligence inserted from the 5. Chap. and 9. ver in stead of the 8. verse of the 3. Likewise let the Deacons be grave c. For this is the Church Canon directing what manner of Man such an one viz. the Deacon ought to be Thus far OEcumenius and not a word more to this purpose where having really proposed the now much tossed Question mustres up four of the chief Places from which the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter is commonly inferr'd and directs us to learn the Solution of this Doubt therefrom Hence 't is certain that OEcumenius no less than Hierome and Aërius of old and Presbyterians now believ'd the Scriptural Identity of Bishop and Presbyter seeing he having brought up these Scriptures which even in the Judgement of our Adversaries creat to the Hierarchicks a vexatious Scruple and pungent Objection is so far from glossing them as thereby to leave any room for a Diocesan Bishop that he plainly informs us that these Scriptures only suffice to dissolve all our Scruples and period the Dispute 'T is evident then that OEcumenius commenting on Philip. 1. 1. or wherever he seems to say nothing against a superiority of Diocesans spoke only out of compliance with the Custom of his time or some such weakness Neither is the matter less clear of Theodoret who altho' he ascribes an Episcopal Dispensation over the Philippians to Epaphroditus yet even then he looks on him as no ordinary or fixed Officer which is really yeelded by Petavius and is plain from Theodoret himself The Apostle saith he calls a Presbyter a Bishop as we shewed when we expon'd the Epistle to the Philippians Which may be also learn'd from this Place For after the Precepts proper to Bishops he describes the things that agree to Deacons omitting the Presbyters But as I said of old they call'd the same Men both Bishops and Presbyters but these who are now call'd Bishops they then call'd Apostles But afterward the name of Apostle was left to the real Apostles And the name Bishop giv'n to these that were of old call'd Apostles Thus Epaphroditus was the Apostle of the Philippians Thus was Titus the Apostle of the Cretians Timothy of the Asians Thus the Apostles and Presbyters at Hierusalem write to the Antiochians And on 1 Cor. 12. 28. first Apostles The Apostle saith not God hath sent onlie Twelve Apostles but also the Seventy And these who also received the like Grace For Paul himself after his Calling was of the same Order and Barnabas and many others And again he calls Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians Where 't is clear as the Sun that Theodoret by these his Bishops or Apostles understands only the real Apostles themselves together with Timothy and Titus and other such Evangelists and extraordinary Officers who never had any fixed Station And this was well perceiv'd by the Jesuite Medina who therefore really yeelds Theodoret with Hierome Aërius Augustine c. to the Presbyterians and warmly recented by Petavius who besides many other places spends at once near a whole Chapter to prove Theodoret a self repugnant blunderer Hence it 's clear that they cann't rent Theodoret from us untill Tullus-like they first rent him from himself Wherever therefore these Ancients so spoke as that they seemed not to oppose the Divine Right of Episcopacy 't is clear they did so out of carelesness or unwarrantable Compliance but mostly as may be gather'd from the handling Aërius mett with out of fear least they had derived on their Heads the hate of much of the then degenerating Church and secularizing Clergy Section VIII Moe clear Testimonies of the primitive Doctors against the Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy and for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter produc'd and vindicated THE Bishop saith Ambrose or rather Hilary the ancientest Commentator save some Fragments of Origen now extant because he opens the hidden sense of the Scriptures is said to Prophecy chiefly because he dispenses the words of future hope Behold the very Idea the Ancients still retain'd of a Bishop and yet it 's nothing but the real Notion of every true Pastor or Dispenser of the Word and Sacraments Which Order may now be that of the Presbyters For in the Bishop are all Orders for he is the first Priest that is the Prince of Priests and Prophet and Evangelist And whatsoever else is for fullfilling the Office of the Church and Service of the Faithfull And The Apostle calls Timothy a Presbyter whom he had instituted a Bishop for the first Presbyters were called Bishops so that one Dying the next succeeded And lastly in Aegypt the Presbyters ordain in the Bishop's absence where we see what he means by the Prince of Priests and that with him a Bishop was nothing but the first either in Age or in respect of Ordination amongst the Colledge of Presbyters without any other Preheminence or Power over the rest but what these respects gave them Which I 'm sure exceeds not the Dignity of a Moderator of a Synod or Presbyter But because the following Presbyters were not found worthy of the first place this way was changed by a Council that none by his being first in order but by his desert might be made a Bishop and that by the Votes of many Priests least an unworthy Man should rashly usurp the Office to the offence of many There were born Priests under the Law of the Race of Aaron the Levite but now all are Priests according to the Apostle Peter and therefore Priests may be chosen out of the People And on 1 to Timothy 3. But after the Bishop he straight way subjoins the Ordination of a Deacon and why But because of Bishop and Presbyter there 's but
one Ordination for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is first so that every Bishop is a Presbyter not every Presbyter a Bishop for he 's the Bishop who is first among the Presbyters Finally the Apostle shews that Timothy was ordain'd a Presbyter but because he had no other Presbyter before him he was a Bishop And from thence he shews how Timothy can Ordain a Bishop for 't was not lawfull for the Inferiour to Ordain a Superiour § 2. Hence appears the perverseness of Bellarmine affirming that Hilary says only there was no need of a new Election but denies not saith he the necessity of a Consecration or Episcopal Ordination A flat Contradiction of Hilary's express saying that there 's but one Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter and that even Timothy was of no higher Order than that of a Presbyter whose whole primacy consisted in his meer being the first Presbyter in respect of age or time of his Ordination as Hilary hath taught us And so as he doth also all-along thro' the fore-cited Passages explains fully his calling the Bishop Prince of Priests which the Cardinal also objects and shews that thereby we 're to understand only such a Dignity as either meer priority of Ordination or Seniority yeelds Thus Hierome also understands this Title who calls Peter Prince of the Apostles and yet asserts that any Priority Peter had was given to his Age only which in that very place he makes as good as nothing Informing us that the Church was equally founded on all the Apostles and that the rest no less than Peter received the Keys Take but another place of Hilary By Angels saith he the Apostle means the Bishops as we learn in the Revelation of John who being Men are challeng'd for not reproving the people or commended for their Vertues And because Sin entred by the Woman she ought to have this token that in the Church for the reverence to the Bishop her head ought not to be free but cover'd with a vail and she has not power to speak because the Bishop represents Christ's person she ought therefore because of the Original of Transgression appear subject before the Bishop as before the Judge because he is the Lord's Vice-gerent Here we see that according to Hilary there was a Bishop over every Congregation and in every place of publick Worship frequented by Men and Women and that the Apocalyptick Angels were only such Congregational Pastors From which we may well gather that when any in these early times had the name Bishop more peculiarly giv'n them yet the Primacy could be but only of Order and nominal which is fitly illustrated by the Athenian Archons Petavius therefore to shield his Cause from so deadly blows does his outmost to discredite these Commentaries and make their Author some obscure fellow and to prove they belong not to Hilary the Luciferian he brings two passages thereof that shew their Author to have been of the Roman Communion which Hilary deserted But might he not have been of that Communion when he wrote the commentaries and yet deserted it afterward This the Jesuit attempts not to disprove But whosoever this Author was or by whatsoever name known neither are we hurt nor the Hierarchicks helped thereby his Authority is unquestionably great being cited by the Councils of Paris and Ayx no mean Conventicles under the name of Ambrose afterward the learn'd as Bellarmine and the Divines of Lovain gave these Commentaries to Hilarie a Roman Deacon and stout Opposer of the Arrians the Foundation of which Opinion is strong For Augustine oftner than once attributes these Commentaries to Hilarie And it 's likely that Petavius knew that the Authority of this Writer was not to be shaken with all his Cavills but only at that time he had found nothing else to say wherefore he afterwards excogitats more Quibbles to darken and deprave this Author and chiefly strives to make Hilary speak nothing for the Right of Seniority and against the Election of a Successor to any deceasing Bishop He says therefore that when Hilary tells us that one dying the next or following succeeded we must not understand it in respect of Years or Ordination but any of 'em indefinitly taken who was notwithstanding afterward to be elected by the Clergy but all the Presbyters in time becoming unworthie of the Episcopal Honour the Method was altered and another not out of the Colledge of Presbyters but out of some other Order according to their desert was admitted unto that Office To support which Gloss he brings Hierome's saying that the Presbyters of Alexandria named one elected from among themselves Bishop as if Hierome were not speaking of Alexandria alone and to instance therein that Prelacy came not soon to any growth or as if Hierome and Hilary could not agree in its being of humane Original and yet differ in the circumstances of its rise The rest of his prolix Discourse on this Theme is only a train of meer Cavills and Clouds too thin and airy to feed a very Chamaeleon all which are quite dissolv'd and disappear if we but look into one small parcell of Hilary's words where he tells us that after the Method was altered then the Bishop whose desert raised him was constitute by the Judgement or Votes of many Priests or Presbyters For this Clause being of design inserted by Hilarie to shew the Opposition between the latter and the former Method of coming to the Primacy proclaims that as after the Change Suffrages and Election were used so before this Change there had been no such Custome With this the Jesuite darrs not ingage nor with Hilary's making the Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter the same his making Timothy only a Presbyter his placing all the Essence or Constitutive of a Bishop in being the first Presbyter of the Colledge his giving a Bishop to every Congregation c. These I say he never adventures once in the least to handle wherefore surely he was conscious to himself that he spent both Pains and Brains for the sole production of a bulkish nothing § 3. To Hilary I add Chrysostome which Theoplylact his real Epitomator transcribes After saith he the Apostle had discoursed concerning the Bishops and described them declaring what they ought to have and from what they ought to abstain omitting the order of Presbyters he descends to the Deacons and why so But because between Bishop and Presbyter in a manner there is no difference seeing that also to the Presbyters the Care or Government the Church is committed and whatsoever he said of Bishops agrees also to the Presbyters in Ordination alone they are Superiour and they seem to have this onlie more than the others Where he clearly overthrows all their Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter notwithstanding that to some he may seem to give the Power of Ordination to Bishops above Presbyters For First The words are most
mannerly Complement to Augustine A piece of immodesty proper to D. M. not arriv'd at by the Jesuite Augustine then was only some frenchisi'd Spark that intended not to speak as he thought but I reply with Junius that this their Answer is clean contrary to Augustine ' s mind and intention for he was not so mad as to compare things so hetrogeneous as were the Rites and Customes of the Gentiles and these of the Church if it be said that he spoke of the Church of the Jews where pray is there any mention of Bishops in all the Old Testament and History of the Jewish Church I add that if this had been Augustine's meaning he had too much drepress'd and in too unworthy Terms express'd Christ's Institution to busk a Complement for Hierome But Augustine saith D. M. reasons from the Succession of Bishops This Romish Cavill is a 1000 times baffl'd and by none more sufficiently than by Dr. Stillingfleet who shews that from such Reasonings of the Fathers and their mentioning of Successions of Bishops it can never be proved that Bishops were of a higher Order or had any other Power over Presbyters nor that in all places there was so much as any Difference at all between them nor that they mean'd ought save a Succession of Doctrine and that no less is said of Presbyters Lastly Bishop Jewel advanceth this very passage of Augustine and thereby proves the Identity of Bishop and Priest or Presbyter And he thus Englishes Augustine's words The Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now obtain'd § 7. Let us saith Hierome attend diligently to the words of the Apostle saying that thou should'st Ordain Elders in every City as I appointed thee and what kind of Presbyter ought to be ordain'd he declares in the following Discourse If any saith he be blameless the Husband of one Wife c. and after he Inferrs For a Bishop must be blameless as the Steward of God Therefore both Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same And before that by Sathan's instigation there were Divisions about Religion and it was said in the Churches I am of Paul I of Apollo and I of Cephas the Church was govern'd by a common Council of Presbyters But after that whomsoever any had baptized were by them counted their own not Christs it was Decreed thro' the whole World that one Chosen out of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom all care of the Church should belong and the Seeds of Division be removed But you may think that this is our Mind and not the Mind of the Scriptures that a Bishop and a Presbyter is one and the same thing and that the one is a Name of Age and the other of Office Let them read over the words of the Apostle to the Philippians where as Hierome professedly asserts the Presbyterian Thesis so he clearly proves it by the Presbyterian Arguments And I would fain learn wherein as touching the Scriptural Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he differ'd from Aërius They differ'd as much answers Bellarmine as Heaven and Hell For Hierome still held that a Bishop was greater than a Presbyter as to the point of Ordination and that doubtless by Divine Right Bellarmine is herein follow'd only by some of the more impudent of his Brethren as Bayly the Jesuite and Petavius and last of all appears their perpetual shadow D. M. with whom Hierome is a grand Asserter of the Episcopal Hierarchy and Aërius a grand Heretick But Junius answers to both the Jesuites and their Genuine Issue that Hierome when he said what doth the Bishop except Ordination which a Presbyter does not understood it only of his oun time But Bellarmine saith Junius confounds the time as doth D. M. that he more easily may deceive the Simple We have heard already that many of the greatest Lights of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists have exploded this shamefull and Jesuitical Attempt of making Hierome for the Divine Right of Prelacy or for any Difference between Bishop and Presbyter To which add Dr. Stillingfleet For saith he as to the Matter it self I believe upon the strickest Enquiry Medina ' s Judgement will prove true that Hierome Austine Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were all of Aërius ' s Judgement as to the Identity of both Name and Order of Bishops and Presbyters in the primitive Church c. Of what Church then shall we count D. M. and his Brethren who only scrape together these most dishonest and a thousand times baffl'd depravations and perversions of the Jesuites and being plum'd with the feathers of so unlucky Birds can appear without any more shame and blushing than as if they were the innocent penns of a Dove But Hierome subjoins Bellarmine who is transcrib'd by D. M. acknowledges that the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter as also the Princely Prerogatives of Bishops was introduc'd by the very Apostles when 't was said I am of Paul c. But it 's answer'd by Junius that the former of these can never be prov'd from Hierome and the latter Hierome denies while he saith when these whom any baptiz'd were counted their own c. Where saith Junius Hierome shews that 't was not when this Evil was at Corinth only but when 't was spread thro' the whole Churches And the latter of these continues Junius Paul denies while he reproves this Evil in the Corinthians and yet neither in the first nor in the second Epistle makes ever the least mention of setting up a Bishop over them They who use this Argument saith Dr. Stillingfleet among many other Answers far better than ever such a Cavill deserv'd are greater Strangers to St. Hierome ' s Language then they would seem to be whose Custome it is upon incidental Occasions to accommodat the Phrase and Language of Scripture to them as when he speaks of Chrysostome ' s Fall cecidit Babylon cecidit of the Bishops of Palestine multi utroque claudicant pede All which Instances saith the Doctor are produc'd by Blondel but have the good fortune to be pass'd over without being taken nottice of And now judge whether there was more Ignorance or Impudence in D. M's following Query Whether the Opinion of St. Hierome be not disingenuously represented by the Presbyterians since he never acknowledg'd nor affirm'd any intervall after the Death of the Apostles in which Ecclesiastical Affairs were govern'd communi Presbyterorum consilio Bellarmine objects also as doth his Epe D. M. that Hierome says James was made Bishop of Jerusalem presently after the Death of our Saviour But both are repell'd by Iunius who shews that the common reading of that place of Hierome ' s Catalogue is corrupted And Answers that James was only left while the Apostles
went thro' the World for the Commodity of that Church and was never absolutely ordain'd a Bishop by the Apostles for James himself was an Apostle Of the same Mind is Salmasius that James resided not at Jerusalem as one of their Hierarchick Bishops but as an Apostle And yet D. M. is not asham'd to tell his Reader as the Concession of Salmasius that we have a Diocesan Bishop establish'd in the person of St. James the Just in the City of Jerusalem Now that Hierome understood James's Episcopacy in the sense giv'n by Junius and Salmasius against the Jesuites is most apparent especially if we consider how the Ancients us'd to speak of the Apostles and Apostolick extraordinary Church-Officers in the Stile of their own times and how positive Hierome was for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter during the Apostolick age and first primitive Church Add hereto that Hierome as he shews in his Preamble to Dexter was altogether uncertain of much of what he wrote in his Catalogue of Writers which is yet more clear from his account of Paul for the writes that he was a Native of Gischalis and during the Wars between the Jews and Romans sted with his Parents to Tarsus when Gischalis was taken Which I 'm sure Hierome a Man so well acquaint with the Affairs of the Jews who had no Wars with the Romans for many years after the time wherein the Fabler whom Hierome transcribes suppos'd these Wars to have been commens'd and Gischalis taken could never believe but only because he could light on no better transcrib'd things as he found ' em Which removes tho' no more could be said D. M's Objection from Hierome's mentioning of Ignatius his Epistles whereon D. M. with no small Ostentation insists He follows also Bellarmine objecting that Hierome makes Bishops the Apostles Successors But Junius Replies that Hierome denies not this to be also the priviledge of Presbyters It 's also objected by Dr. Pearson that Hierome in his Epistle to Heliodorus speaks of the Deacons as the third Order And seeing this of all the passages of Hierome produc'd by the Papists to involve him in self-repugnancy is most plausible take it at full length If a Man saith Hierome desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good Work These things we know but add what follows A Bishop then must be blameless c. and having express'd the rest of the things which there follow concerning a Bishop the Apostle uses no less diligence in setting forth the Duties of the third Degree saying Likewise let the Deacons be grave c. But passing that he was scarce more than a Child when he wrote that Epistle and wrote clearly for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter in his riper years it 's certain he pretends no Divine Warrant for this Tripartition Yea from the very words they would now detort it 's most evident that tho' Hierome following the Custome of his Age mentions a third Degree he notwithstanding takes both Paul's Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same thing Moreover in this same Epistle Hierome makes all who had the Power of Dispensing the Sacraments Successor to the Apostles which the Jesuites and their Supporters appropriat to Bishops hence they are baffl'd with the very places of Hierome they endeavour to abuse § 7. But I return to Hierome Philippi continues he is a single Town of Macedonia and truly in one City there could not be called are they as moe Bishops But because at that time they called the same Men both Bishops and Presbyters therefore he spoke indifferently concerning both Bishops and Presbyters From these words saith Petavius It can be evidently demonstrated that Hierome believed that Bishops and Presbyters were not one and the same Order yea even in the Age of the Apostles For had he so believ'd he had never said that there could not be a plurality of Bishops in one City when surely there was a plurality of Presbyters As if Jerome's whole discourse scope and conclusion were not directly opposite to what the Jesuite impudently fathers on him who in the words Petavius abuses only meets with some Wranglers as he elsewere terms them who to elude the proof Jerome brought for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter from Philippians 1. 1. absurdly contended that in the City of Philippi alone there were a multitude of Bishops distinguish d from and superior to other Pastors But yet this may seem doubtfull continous Jerome to some except it be confirmed by another Testimony It is written in the Acts of the Apostles that when the Apostle was come to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and called for the Elders of that Church to whom amongst other things he said take heed to your selves and to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of Christ. And observe this diligently how the Apostle calling the Elders of Ephesus which was but one City afterwards names them Bishops if any receive the Epistle which under Paul's Name is written to the Hebrews there also the care of the Church is equally divided amongst a plurality For he writes to the People Obey your Governours and be subject to them for they watch And Peter who received his Name from the strength of his Faith saith in his Epistle The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder We have enlarged on these things that we might shew that among the Ancients Bishops were all one with Presbyters Hierome then never as Petavius and his Followers impudently pretend thought that there had hapned no alteration or that Bishops bore greater bulk in his time than they had done in the Age of the Apostles but by little and little to the end the seeds of Schism might be remov'd the whole care was devolv'd upon one wherefore as the Presbyters know that by the Custome of the Church they are subject to their prefect so let Bishops know that rather by Custome than by the Truth of Christ's Institution they are greater than Presbyters and ought to Rule the Church in common with them imitating Moses who when he alone had Power to Rule the Israelites chused other Seventy with whom he might judge the People Here say they is a proof of Superiority of Bishops by Divine Right but they should remember that Hierome here undertook to prove the quite contrary And it 's most injust to fish and search for self-contradictions in any Author when with ease he may be understood otherways as the Matter is here Hierome is arguing a majori ad minus from Moses his Practice who tho' he had sole Authority by Divine Right yet shar'd it with others to that which ought to have been done by the Bishops of his time whom only Church Custome not Christ's Appointment had raised over other Pastors And indeed they might on equal grounds inferr from John 13. 14. If I then your Lord and Master have washed your
Feet ye onght also to Wash one anothers Feet that every Apostle yea and every Believer is Lord and Master of the rest § 8. And writing to Euagrius I hear saith Hierome there is one so mad as to preferr the Deacons to the Presbyters that is to the Bishops For seeing the Apostle clearly teaches that Bishops and Presbyters are one and the same how can a Server of Tables and Widows proudly preferr himself to these at whose Prayers the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood is consecrated you will require a Proof hear a Testimony Paul and Timothy to all the Saints in Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons would you have another Example in the Acts of of the Apostles Paul thus speaks to the Presbyters of one Church Take heed to your Selves and the whole Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Rule the Church c. And that none may contentiously plead that in one City there were many Bishops here also another Testimony wherein it 's most evidently proved that both Presbyter and Bishop were one and the same and then produces the 1 to Titus and 1 to Timothy 4. 8. 14. neglect not with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytry And 1 Peter 4 and 1. 2 John 1. 3 John 1. And all these to prove that he had undertaken viz that both Bishop and Presbyter were one and the same Now it 's most observable that that he inferrs this Conclusion not only from Scriptures written long after the first Epistle to the Corinthians where it 's said I am of Paul c. but even from the last Epistle of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles And therefore no less notticeable is D. M's extream stubborness and aversion from Truth who would force Hierome to introduce Bishops presently after that Schism mention'd 1 Cor. 1. And accordingly as his bad Cause oblig'd him to do with this and the rest of Hierome's Testimonies wholly smuther'd it And indeed all hitherto who have adventur'd to graple therewith have been conquer'd thereby yea even Bellarmine himself is compell'd to give up the Cause Hierome indeavours saith the Jesuite to conclude the equality of Bishops and Presbyters from the Epistle to Titus to the Philippians and from the Epistles of Peter and John which were written after the first Epistle to the Corinthians Neither can the Jesuite find another way to be even with Hierome but by arraigning him as fraughted with self-repugnancy levity and instability in this Matter and all the Arguments he brings to prove Hierome a Favourer of Episcopacy are only so many fruitless Attempts to make that appear But let us go on with Hierome But saith he the reason why after this viz. the writing of both the Epistles of John one was chosen and set over the rest was that there might be a remedy of Schism least every one drawing the Church of Christ to himself should divide it For in Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist even to Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters still gave to one elected from amongst themselves and placed in a higher seat the Name of Bishop as if an Army should creat a General or the Deacons should chuse one of themselves whom they know to be industrious and name him Arch-Deacon On these words D. M. triumphs The Custome was saith he even from the days of St. Mark the Evangelist that a Presbyter was chosen who Governed the whole Society this in the Opinion of St. Hierome cuts off that imaginary Interval wherein the Chruch is said to have been Governed by a Parity of Presbyters Where he forgeth a Gloss no way contain'd in the words of Hierome whose Example of an Army and Deacons are only adduc'd to shew the manner of that Presbyter or nominat'd Bishop's entrance and not at all the measure of his Power over his Collegues And that no Power over the rest can be collected from this place is beyond Scruple clear from Hierome's present Scope who introduces this Ancient Alexandrian Practice to clear and prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter which according to him remain'd in the Church for a while after the Writings of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles Had D. M. perused Dr. Stillingfleet he had taught him that both Election and Ordination of this Alexandrian Bishop was only performed by his Fellow Presbyters that the Original of Hierome ' s exsors potestas any Power he mentions in Bishops over Presbyters is by Hierome attributed not to any Episcopal Institution but to the free choice of the Presbyters themselves for what doth a Bishop continues Hierome except Ordination which a Presbyter may not do Here the Jesuites and their Follower D. M. dream they find a fine Distinction made by Hierome between Bishop and Presbyter but first they must make an unseasonable Antiptosis and compell Hierome to speak contrary to the express words of this place which are in the present Tense contrary to the scope and design of this Epistle which is professedly to shew the great Dignity of Presbyters yea even their Identity with Bishops and thereby to reach a sharper reproof to the petulant Deacon And contrary finally to Hierome's most clear and most frequently repeated Doctrine of the Scriptural Identity of both Offices Were it not madness then to dream with the Jesuits that in these words Hierome makes any Distinction between the Scripture Bishop and Presbyter who is here only asserting that in all places Rome excepted where the Presbyters were more depressed and the Deacons more raised than in other Churches even then in his time a Presbyter was allow'd by the Canons and Constitutions of the Churches to do ought that a Bishop might do save Ordination alone This his Design of holding forth the most great dignity of Presbyters yea even their equality with Bishops which Bellarmine acknowledges that he may the better compesce the Insolency of the Deacons Hierome all along this Epistle prosecutes and having again cited the Epistles to Timothy and Titus to prove that a Presbyter is contain'd in i. e. is one and the same with a Bishop otherwayes a Deacon is also in a Bishop and so Hierome had crossed his own Design by the very Argument wherewith he minded to compass it and having added some other Topicks to the same purpose thus concludes his Epistle And that we may know that the Apostolick Traditions are brought from the Old Testament that which Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons claim in the Church Nunc animis opus Aenaeae nunc pectore firmo All the Jesuites and their Complices will presently be about our Ears But Solamen nobis Soeios habuisse malorum Their Attaques are no less on Hierome than us wherefore this is one of the chief places brought by Bellarmine to involve Hierome in a maze of self-contradiction and make him propugn Prelacy who is followed by others of the Hierarchicks but
chiefly the Jesuites And lastly in the rear comes D. M. concluding that the Hierarchy of the Christian Church is founded upon Apostolick Tradition and that the Apostles had the Modell of the Temple in their view when they erected this Plat-form But Junius Answers that their Conclusion is a non sequitur For saith he this comparison is not particular between each of these particular Officers under the Old Testament and these under the New but in common shewing that as they are all obliged to serve the Church of the Jews so all the Church-Officers under the New Testament ought to serve the Christian Church Moreover continues Junius tho' we should give that the Comparison were particular yet their Conclusion would not follow seeing Hierome speaks only of the Church Polity of his own time and the Question now is about Hierome's Sentiments of the Church Government and Polity in the Apostolick Age and first primitive Church And that this in Hierome's Mind was not Hierarchick but a meer Parity of Pastors Junius already evinced and Dr. Stillingfleet at more length overthrows this their Jesuitical Doctrine and Demonstrats that by Apostolical Tradition in Hierome only Ecclesiastick Custome of some Antiquity is mean'd asserts that it 's not imaginable that Jerome who had been proving all along the Superiority of a Presbyter above a Deacon because of his Identity with a Bishop in the Apostles times should at the same time say that a Bishop was above a Presbyter by the Apostles Institution and so directly overthrow all he had been saying before The plain meaning continues Dr. Stillingfleet then of Jerome is no more but this that as Aaron and his Sons in the Order of Priesthood were above the Levites under the Law So the Bishops and Presbyters in the Order of the Evangelical Priesthood are above the Deacons under the Gospel For the Comparison runs not between Aaron and his Sons under the Law and Bishops and Presbyters under the Gospel but between Aaron and his Sons as one part of the Comparison under the Law and the Levites under them as the other so under the Gospel Bishops and Presbyters make one part of the Comparison answering to Aaron and his Sons in that wherein they all agree viz. the Order of Priesthood and the other part under the Gospel is that of Deacons answering to the Levites under the Law The Opposition is not then in the Power of Jurisdiction between Bishops and Priests but between the same Power of Order which is alike both in Bishops and Presbyters according to the acknowledgement of all to the Office of Deacons which stood in Competition with them Hereby we see how unhappyly those Arguments succeed which are brought from the Analogy between the Aaronical Priesthood to endeavour the setting up of a Jus Divinum of a paralell Superiority under the Gospel All which Arguments are taken off by this one thing we 're now upon viz that the Orders and Degrees under the Gospel were not taken up from Analogy to the Temple Other passages of Jerome they also study to abuse but these now handl'd are the most specious But of such Allegatâ—ons out of Jerome hear the same Dr. And among all these fifteen Testimonies produced by a learned Writer out of Jerome for the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters I cannot find one that doth found it upon any Divine Right but only upon the conveniency of such an Order for the Peace and Unity of the Church of God But granting some passages may have a more favourable aspect towards the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters in his other Writings I would fain know whether a Man's Judgement must be taken from occasional and accidental Passages or from designed and set Discourses which is as much as to ask whether the lively Representation of a man by picture may be best taken when in hast of other business he passeth by us giving only a glance of his countenance or when he purposely and designedly sits in order to that end that his countenance may be truly represented He adds that Jerome in his Commentaries where he expresly declares not his own mind transcribes often out of others without setting down their names c. § 9. Most dishonest therefore is the conduct of the Loyolites and of others of the Prelatists their Associats in this Matter but above all men that of D. M. who beside all this his foul dealling following Bayly the Iesuite has scarce adventur'd to lay before his Reader in â—nglish so much as one scrape or particle of what the Reform'd bring from Jerome against the Romanists and such Hierarchick Advocats which in D. M. is the most certain product of both extream Disingenuity Diffidence But so great is the power of prejudice that they stick not to sacrifice both their Credit and whatsoever else they should reckon most estimable to such Dreams as even most of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists either acted by the love of the Truth or compell'd by its Power had condemn'd We have heard how Bishop Jewel Dr. Morton the Bishop of Spalato and Dr. Stillingfleet renounce and explode so palpable an untruth And Dr. Forbes is of the same Mind yeelding that Hierome is all one with Aërius in this that Bishops by Divine Right are not at all Superior to Presbyters And that these two are intirely of one and the same Mind we have heard also granted by the most learn'd of the Romanists as Alphonsus de Castro and Medina some whereof acknowledge that none could be of another Opinion concerning them And Benedictus Justinianus and other Romanists are of the same Mind How then were all these Doctors sitting in Council to determine of this very Matter should they chastise and brand these most partial and disingenuous Dealers we have now to do with Other Hierarchicks who would not confess so much in plain Terms yet sometimes discover both their disingenuity and true Sentiments so palpably as if they had expresly made the same Confession Dr. Pearson tho' he says nothing in his own Name yet acknowledges that Hierome hath said so much for the Authority of Presbytry and endeavoured so much to establish it that he is judged to make it well nigh equal to the Episcopal Order And Bellarmine tells us that Hierome was self repugnant and knew not what he said And Petavius tho' the most pertinacious wrangler of all the Society grants that Hierome makes Presbyters well nigh all one with Bishops but not the very same saith the Jesuite or intirely their Equalls being Inferior in so much as they want the Power of Ordination And that according to Hierome's Mind meer Custome and not the Lord 's Appointment gave to the Bishops above Presbyters any Power they have either in Ruling the Church or external Government And were things brought to this pass I 'm sure they should make but small account of the sory remainder Petavius makes
a profitable departure for they are not afrai'd least any thrust them out of their places into others For we see that you have cast some from their Charge which they perform'd with honour It 's base Beloved yea very base and unworthy of a Conversation that is in Christ Jesus to hear that the most stable and ancient Church of Corinth for the sake of one or two should raise sedition against the Presbyters And If I be the Cause of Contention schism and sedition I 'le depart and be gone whithersoever ye will and do what the People shall command providing only that the sheepfold of Christ with the Presbyters appointed over it may have peace And And you therefore who were the Authors of this Division subject your selves to your Presbyters Hence Observe First that he never names or so much as insinuats that in Corinth there was any Bishop Superintendent over the rest of the Pastors But as the Apostle to the Hebrews had done before him honours equally all their Pastors with the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these that bear Rule over them Secondly That in imitation of the same Apostle Paul he names only Bishops and Deacons as the only Orders of Divine Institution by whom the whole Gospel-Service was to be perform'd Therefore afterward when he names Presbyters in distinction from the Flock and as Rulers over it he cann't be understood as Petavius and Pearson would force him to speak of Presbyters with Relation and Respect only of their Age but to give them this Demonstration as a peculiar Designation of a Church-Office and so the word Presbyter most of necessity with Clement coincide in its meaning with the word Bishop and both of 'em become Synonymous Terms to hold forth but one and the same thing Thirdly That the Apostles did not as we find afterward Decreed by the Synod of Sardica and admonish'd by Pope Leo chuse out only the greater Cities and neglect and forbear to place Bishops in lesser Villages that the name of Bishop hereby might not fall into Contempt but indifferently and without distinction of places every where settled them according as there was a probability they might serve the great end of their calling therein Fourthly That to found the Distinction and number of these Orders if we believe Clement the Apostles had no eye unto the Jewish Church-Polity so as to make it a Pattern for that of the Christian but only to what was prophecied and foretold by the Prophets concerning a new frame of the New Testament Church and thus Clement really contradicts all the Patrons of the Hierarchy who would still found their triple Orders on that of the High-Priest Priests and Levites of the Temple Fifthly That in Corinth it was attempted to throw out a plurality of real Bishops and cast them from their Charge and that the Sedition was not moved against one only but divers Bishops in that Church Many other things might be observed but these serve sufficiently to prove that there was a plurality of true Bishops of Corinth who were in nothing distinguished from Pastors of particular Flocks or preaching Presbyters § 2. Petavius notwithstanding cann't abide any such Inference from the words of Clement Wherefore he scrapes together several things whereby to ward off the force of these Passages and alledges that Clemens his silence of the Bishop of Corinth makes nothing for us For Pope Siricius saith he in his Epistle to the Church of Millain maketh no mention of their Bishop altho' in that mean time Ambrose occupied the Chair But the vast Difference between the Cases and the Circumstances of the Churches of Corinth and Millain quite nullifies the Jesuites Instance The People of Millain jointly both Clergy and Laity had thrust out Jovinian few or none of them for ought we hear being prosylited to his Doctrine wherefore Siricius had nothing to do but shew them in General that he had excommunicated Jovinian with two or three others who had fled to Rome for Sanctuary So there was no special Ground or Cause why particular mention should be made of Ambrose the Bishop or any other whether of the Clergy or Laity the whole Body thereof for ought now known being without any Schism earnest enough for the expulsion of Jovinian and only expecting what the Bishop of Rome which they acknowledged as the first See and whether Jovinian had fled would do in this Matter Whereas one the other hand Clemens writes to a Church cut in pieces with a Schism in their own Bowels infected with Sedition of no small part of the People against their Pastors broken with as appears plain a division of the very Pastors themselves and this grown to such a hight that some of the Pastors were thrust from their places and driv'n out now in this Case the Bishop had either the best of it and so the seditious part merited a severe and special reprimand on the account of their Opposition to and Separation from their Bishop and thus he should certainly have been mentioned or else he was the Cause of the Division or at least joined with the injurious and therefore should have been particularly reproved or admonished Clement it 's true names none but the influence which the good or evil Carriage the Bishop had and could not but have in such a Matter had certainly obliged Clement either to mention his name of give some signification of him if there had been any Diocesan Bishop existent in Corinth Clemens speaks of several Pastors of Flocks which I think none will deny intimats the diversity of their Carriage in that Business and gives Directions accordingly How can it be apprehended that he should pass over the chief Pastor and go to the rest without so much as the least Direction unto him the least mention of him yea or the least insinuation that there was in Corinth any such thing Petavius's next Attempt is on these words of Clement where he tells that the Apostles instituted Bishops and Deacons And the Jesuite contends that two distinct Orders are not here mean'd but that the word Deacon is only explicative of the former word Bishop and cites several places where the word Deacon is taken in a signification of Honour and applied to the Apostles and Civil Magistrates And afterward terms Salmasius ridiculous for saying that Clemens nam'd only Bishops and Deacons without mention of Presbyters For saith the Jesuite Presbyters are more frequently mention'd by Clement than either Bishops or Deacons But certainly these Orders are again and again mention'd by Clement without adding any thereto ordetracting therefrom when he appears to reckon up all the Church-Officers that are of Divine Institution And altho' the word Deacon be sometimes taken for the Designation of a higher Office Yet as Petavius himself else where observes It is with the addition of such a word or phrase as guides our Judgement and gives us to learn that by it is not understood this
hatefull Hypothesis of some giddy Papaturiants which as we have heard even the more candide of the Episcopalls disclaim and explode I shall shut up all concerning Clement with the Suffrages of two illustrious Names neither whereof I 'm sure did ever favour Presbytry I mean Grotius and Stillingfleet Had Episcopacy saith the Doctor been instituted on the occasion of the Schism at Corinth certainly of all places we should the soonest have heard of a Bishop at Corinth for the remedying of it and yet almost of all places these Heralds that derive the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times are the most plunged whom to six on at Corinth And they that can find any one single Bishop at Corinth at the time when Clemens writ his Epistle to them about another Schism as great as the former which certainly had not been according to their Opinion if a Bishop had been there before must have better Eyes and Judgement than the deservedly admired Grotius who brings this in his Epistle to Bignonius as an Argument of the undoubted Antiquity of that Epistle quod nusquam meminit exsortis c. that Clement no where mentions that singular Authority of Bishops which by Church custome after the Death of Mark at Alexandria and by its Example in other places began to be introduced but Clemens clearly shews as did the Apostle Paul that then by the common Council of the Presbyters who both by Paul and Clement are called Bishops the Churches were governed § 4. I proceed next to the Vindication of Polycarp Subject your selves saith he to the Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Christ and as Virgins walk with a pure Conscience let the Presbyters be simple or innocent mercifull in all things turning all Men from their Errors visiting all who are weak not neglecting Widows Orphans and those that are Poor but alwayes providing such things as are good in the sight of God and Men. Here we learn that the highest Office then in the Church of Philippi was that of a Presbyter and that there was a Plurality to whom the Philippians were to be subjected without the least mention of a particular Bishop governing those Presbyters And which deserves no overly Consideration we here see that as when Clement gives an account of Church Orders he named two only so we have the same number expressed by Polycarp but they altered their Denomination of the former Order and they whom Clement calls sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters Polycarp calls still Presbyters It 's most observable also how both Paul and Polycarp subject the Church of one single City Philippi to a Plurality or Multitude of Pastors whom Paul calls Bishops and Polycarp Presbyters From all which the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter most inevitably results § 5. And indeed this Passage of Polycarp so much gravells the Hierarchicks that Dr. Pearson is driven to his last Leggs and compelled to present us with a shift unworthy of its Author Who can prove saith he that the Bishop of Philippi was then alive who can shew us that the Philippians asked not Counsel at Polycarp for this cause that they then enjoyed not a Bishop for thus Polycarp bespeaks them These things Brethren I write not of my self to you concerning righteousness but you have moved me thereunto Thus Pearson and indeed it 's enough here to return the Question inverted who is able to prove if there had been a Bishop in Philippi that he was not alive For seeing he affirms it he or his Advocats are obliged to instruct what they say That which he pretends to from these words of the Epistle wherein Polycarp saith he was moved thereto by the Philippians themselves affords him not the least support there not being therein one syllable concerning the vacancy of the Bishops Seat or the Church Government during this Defect or how to fill the Chair Of all or any of these nec vol◠nec vestigium but only as is evident from Polycarp they seem to have desir'd of him some Direction concerning the blameless walk of any Christian. And indeed the Bishop within a very few lines fairly yeelds the Cause really acknowledging that he had said nothing to the purpose But seeing saith he these things are uncertain we have no certainty from the Discourse of Polycarp Well then it must follow for ought he knew that Polycarp knew no Diocesan Bishop in Philippi that he had never heard of his Death seeing nothing hereof can be gathered from him And that he had never heard of his Life or Being we may well conclude from this that he devolves the whole Church-Affairs upon a Plurality of Presbyters But once again Is it at all credible but that if Polycarp had written to the Philippians after the death of their Bishop and during the vacancy of the Chair he had comforted them after this so considerable a Loss and giv'n them Directions for chusing of a worthy Successor especially if as Pearson would have they had ask'd his counsell concerning this very Matter Had ever a Pastor like Polycarp neglected so seasonable an Office His profound silence therefore of the Death of any such Bishop in Philippi sufficiently demonstrats that this Dr. Pearson's Invention was only the product of a desperate Cause and that there was left here no doore of Escape And here let me observe that Philippi is no less fatal to the Episcopals than its neighbouring plains were to the Pompeians for they are stung and confounded with the very first words of Paul to that Church and as we have heard amongst their other wild shifts they answer that the Bishop was often absent But there was a good number of years between the writing of Paul and that of Polycarp to the Philippians and yet we see the Bishop is never come home Why taryeth the wheel of his Lordship's Chariot Hath he not sped at Court And having supplanted some of the Nobility made a prey of the Office of Chancellour or Treasourer that after so long absence there is no news of his return Nor are we ever like to hear any more of him for now say they he 's dead I had perhaps believ'd them were 't not impossible for one to die who was never alive But enough of this for such Answers would really tempt one to think that their Authors studi'd nothing more than to ridicule their oun Cause and afford Game to their Reader § 6. And here I cann't but nottice the ill-grounded vapouring of D. M. who from the inscription of the Epistle Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him concludes that he was vested with Episcopal jurisdiction and eminency amongst these Presbyters And so much he pretends to bring out of Blondel as as his forc'd Confession which is so far from being true that it 's brought in by Blondel as an Objection and silly Conjecture of the Episcopals which he diverse ways overthrows And indeed never was there a more wretch'd deduction fram'd
seeing as Blondel at large shews the phrase natively yealds only this sense viz. Polycarp and the rest of the Presbyters of that Colleage And thus D. M. may as well inferr Peter's Superiority and Power over the rest of the Apostles from Acts 2. 37. To Peter and to the rest of the Apostles Moreover Blondel demonstrats how on diverse accounts Polycarp without any Eminency and Power over the rest may be particularly nominated rather than others as because he was first in Order and Years But I insist not herein but referr to Blondel who hath nervously baffl'd this their pitifull Coujecture D. M. adventures to ingage with nothing of what he saith and yet is not asham'd to bring to the Field so blunted a weapon I pass also D. M.'s two Arguments for Polycarp's Diocesan Episcopacy drawn from the pretended Succession of Diocesan Bishops in Smyrna and the Epistles of Ignatius mention'd by Polycarp having overthrown both of 'em already and proceed to the Testimony of Hermas who thus speaks Thou shalt write two Books thou shalt send one to Clement and one to Graptes and Clement shall send it to foraign Cities for to him this is permitted and Graptes shall admonish the Widows and Orphans but thou shalt read it with or relate it unto the Presbyters in this City who govern the Church Where we see that not any one Bishop but a Colledge of Presbyters call'd doubtless afterward by the same Author Bishops govern'd the Church of one City Yet D. M. pretends to find here a palpable Evidence of Episcopacy For saith he the sending of the Encyclical Epistle to foraign Cities is insinuated to be the peculiar Priviledge of Clement then Bishop of Rome But if he conclude from this place of Hermas that Clement had any Power over these to whom he was to send that Book or Epistle as for Clement's being Bishop of Rome it 's so far from being insinuated here that the quite contary is from this very place most evident he may as well inferr from Col. 4. 16. that they had Power over the Laodiceans whither they were to send and cause to be read the Apostle's Letter Secondly D. M. ascribing to the Bishop of Rome Power over foraign Cities erects a Pope rather than a Bishop But I 'll assure him he came not in so early for seeing there was undoubtedly one Bishop at least in every particular City so soon as there were any in the World this place of Hermas if it bear D. M's Inference and give a Power to Clement over foraign Cities insinuats nothing of a Bishop's Dignity above Presbyters but of the power of one Bishop over another or rather of a Pope over other Churches A falshood most unanimously exploded by Cyprian Jerome Augustine and the rest of the Ancients D. M. seeks also for his Prelacy in these words of Hermas viz. The Earthly Spirit exalts it self and seeks the first seat Some contend for Principality and Dignity But what if Hermas had said that some contended to get an Empire and Popedome over the whole Church would D. M. hence conclude that it was lawfull or then practised in the Church or when the Apostles contended who should be the greatest Had Christ before that time assured them of the lawfulness of such an Office and told them that they were to have one to be a Prince over the rest By no Logick therefore can it be inferred for Hermas his words that a chief Seat or Principality for both are one and the same with Hermas was then either exercised or held lawfull Again tho' both had been then in Custome no Power of one over the rest can be hence concluded seeing the chief Seats are given to the Moderators of Synods and other Presidents of Assemblies who have no primacy of Power but only of Order And again The polished and white Stones saith Hermas are the Apostles and Bishops and Doctors and Deacons who walked in the Clemency of God aâ—d exercised the Office of a Bishop and taught and served And Such are some Bishops that is Governours of the Churches and these who have the Charâ—e of the Services § 7. In both places saith Blondel he makes only two Degrees that of the Bishops who governed the Churches and that of the Deacons who had the charge of the Services for it 's acknowledged by all that the Doctors are all one with the Bishops when they are said to have performed the Office of a Bishop and that the Apostles as they are opposed to Bishops were placed above the whole Clergy This repons D. M. is Tergiversation with a Witness and a fraudulent Trick in Blondel since Presbyters in the primitive Church are frequently distinguished by the Name of Doctors and Blondel's Commentary is a manifest violence offered to the Text for Doctors are not said to have performed the Office of a Bishop but to have taught and this is very agreeable to their Character being so much imploy'd by their respective Bishops in teaching the Catechumeni and the natural position of these words will allow of no other meaning Which Answer D. M. hath learned from the Practice of our late Bishops during whose Epocha the Buffund might have hid himself well nigh the whole year from the Bishop's fury in the Bishop's pulpit seeing he scarce ever came thither to play the Doctor or ought else As for the Ancient and true primitive Bishops they perpetually preach'd or taught saith Le Moyn Moreover the Fathers generally take Pastor Bishop and Doctor for one and the same as Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret Sedulius and after them Aquinas Haymo Benedictus Justinianus with others on Ephes. 4. 11. Of the same mind are Hierome Augustine and Anselm and the pretended Clemens Romanus cited by Gratian and Benedictus Justinianus and the Fathers of the Council of Carthage Of the same Mind are the ablest of our Episcopals as Field Hammond and Heylen So truly did Blondel say that Bishop and Doctor is universally taken for one and the same Neither was ever the Presbyter either in Cyprian or any other Ancient called Doctor in opposition to the Bishop but to other Ecclesiastick Presbyters who taught not of whose existence as was before touched we have most sufficient assurance But D. M. in contradiction to the Apostle would have a Bishop who is no Teacher or Preacher like the Droll who said he mett with Priests who were no Clerks And seeing with Hermas there are but two Orders of Church-men and Bishops and praesides Ecclesiarum Church Governours are reciprocal Terms taken for one and the same and seeing that his Presbyters are expresly term'd Church-Governours it 's most evident that he takes Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same and that the word Doctor is purely exegetick or explicative of the word Bishop and that both of them which I 'm sure is not unfrequent in all sorts of Authors evidently signifie one and the same thing § 8. I now
observed how Hilary makes the Bishop a sedulous Dispenser of the Words of suture Life And indeed all the Hierarchick Grandeur and Domination whereby a Bishop was intirely Metamorphosed into a quite other thing than what he had once been could never notwithstanding obliterate and blot out of thinking Mens Minds the true Scriptural Notion and Idea thereof The Episcopal Dignity consists in Teaching saith Balsamon And the fourth Council of Carthage decrees that a Bishop shall not be imployed in caring for his houshold Affairs but shall wholly occupy himself in Reading and Praying aud Preaching the Word § 12. 'T were endless to alledge all that may be produc'd to this purpose neither could any Man who ever seriously read the Bible have any other Notion of a true Bishop than what is common to every Pastor of a Congregation seeing the Apostle's Description of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. agrees equally to all of them And here it 's observable that still where Bishops are spoken of in Scripture not only is the Work and Office which is injoin'd them that of Teaching and Feeding but also the Name is correlative to the Flock and not to a Company of Clergy-men as Acts 20. 28. Take heed to your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Feed the Church of God 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof or Bishoping it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly as we have oftner than once demonstrated over every particular Congregation there was a Bishop This Assertion may be strongly confirmed from the undoubted Practice of the Church in the fourth Century even when she was fall'n into no small Declension from the Primitive Purity For the Council of Sardica Decrees that a Bishop may not be placed in a Village or small Town where one Presbyter may suffice Dr. Maurice says that this Canon is justified by the Arrians their great multiplication of Bishops to strengthen their Party But the Council it self assigns a quite different Ground that moved them to make this Decree viz. that the Name and Authority of a Bishop fall not into Contempt Where we see the Design of abolishing the Primitive and Apostolick Custome of giving a Bishop indifferently to every Congregation whether in City or in Countrey was the Introduction of a secular Pomp and Grandeur into the Church which finally resolv'd into a Papal Slavery However this Sardican Canon had not so good effect but that about twenty years after a new Sanction thereto was found needfull for the Council of Laodicea Decrees that it shall not be lawfull to place Bishops in little Villages or Countrey Places but only Visitors and that the Bishops who were already placed in these little Villages and Countrey Places should for the future do nothing without the knowledge of the Bishop of the City Mark how a pace the mild and fraternal Church Regimen is turn'd into a Worldly Domination and Dignity to pave the way for a papal Tyranny These rural Bishops or Countrey-parish Pastors for they can be call'd nothing else whom Dr. Beverige acknowledges for real and true Bishops were also assaulted and the subjecting and inslaving of them to the Prelates and Clergy in the greater Cities design'd by other Councils as that of Ancyrum and of Neocesaria and of Antioch there they are called Chorepiscopi i. e. Countrey Bishops And it has been disputed if these were real true Bishops But the same Dr. Beverige not only yeelds but at large pleads for the Affirmative He pretends in the mean while that anciently Bishops were ordained in Cities only many whereof had according to the model of the Empire such ample Territories that 't was impossible for the Bishop of the City his alone to visit and sufficiently to guide them and so it seem'd needfull for such Bishops to have according to the amplitude of their Bishopricks one or two Coajutors in some Region without the City who might disburden them of some parts of the Episcopal Function which could not be done but by some consecrated Bishops Hence 't was that some of these great Bishops Ordain'd in some part of their large Provinces these Bishops but with this provision that these without their leave should do nothing of moment seeing these Regions also belonged to the Care of the City Bishop which we learn continues he from the tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch where it 's expresly Decreed that no Country Bishop Ordain Presbyter or Deacon without the Bishop of the City to which he and his Region is subject But indeed there 's no such thing to be learn'd from that Canon it only says that the Chorepiscopus and his Region was subject to the City as they really were in a Civil Sense not to the Bishop of the City and tho they had said so it 's no proof of his Conclusion seeing they usually pretended Antiquity for the greatest Innovations How far either in or nigh to the Time of the Apostles the Church was from giving to the Bishop such a Princely Dignity as he pretends or from allowing him to do the Work proper to himself by substitute Vassals none acquainted with what remains of these Ancient times can be ignorant and is already oftner then once evinc'd And now I 'm sorry to find a Protestant of sence and Learning lean on that shamefull and most exploded Falshood viz. that the Apostles took the Government of the Empire for their Pattern of Church-Government and darring to publish such gross Falshoods whereof even the more ingenuous Romanists are ashamed The Ecclesiastical Degrees saith Suave were not Originally Instituted as Dignities Preheminencies Rewards or Honours as now they are and have been many hundred years but with Ministery and Charges otherwise called by St. Paul Works and those that exercise them are called by Christ our Lord in the Gospel Workmen and therefore no Man could then enter into cogitation to absent himself from the Execution thereof in his own Person and if any one which seldom happend retired from the Work 't was not thought reasonable he should have either Title or Profit And tho' the Ministeries were of two sorts some Anciently called as now they are with care of Souls others of temporal things for the sustenance and service of the Poor and Sick as were the Deaconries and other inferiour Works all held themselves equally bound to that Service in Person neither did any think of a substitute but for a short time and for great Impediments much less to take another Charge which might hinder that § 13. Bnd now to go on these Countrey Bishops or Pastors could not yet by all these Councils be Un-bishoped And therefore Pope Damasus must next fall on them and authoratively define that they were stark nought in the Church their Institution wicked and
contrary to the holy Canons And thus he acted suitably to his purpose seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing more than of Domination and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City Decreed also That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome Let us honour say they the Memory of St. Peter that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose but if he approve of what 's already done and think not fit to call it into Question then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable Thus these Fathers many whereof otherwise were excellent Men the first I think that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope 't was not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council Hence it 's to be noted that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors unto a few whom they named Bishops a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers but also in subjecting of the Presbyters yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the City but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities and so on till at length not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder all centred in Rome Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries Moreover Optatus asserts that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop But to proceed these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages so speaks the Council of Antioch He say these Fathers i. e. Paulus Samosatenus suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies Dr. Maurice answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch and near to one another and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks yea were not at all Christians could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie That saith he which next occurrs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops settled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also Ordain'd Among the Jews wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there settled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the Port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth mett there Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes and then proceeds saying Therefore it 's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it 's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett They were pretty throng in Asrick for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present and one hundred and twenty absent and sixty Sees were then Vacant which make in all four hundred sixty and six there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops Thus he And now not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter it 's most certain that at least for upwards of the three first Centuries you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but it had also its proper Bishop I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet no not by Dr. Maurice or any other been or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy good proofs of this Truth may be adduced For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop as Justine Martyr gives to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as we have seen already was purely a Parish Pastor And the 39 Canon saith Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop for to him the Lord's People is committed and for their Souls he must give an Account Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd a Bishop was there and was the Dispenser thereof The High-Priest saith he that is the Bishop preaches to all Men the true Gospel every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries desires to be led to the High-Priest and he brings him to the High-Priest who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders praises the bountifull prinple by which all are
called who are called at all The High-Priest dips him thrice The High-Priest himself having made a holy Prayer at the Divine Altar and beginning to Offer goes round about the whole Chore and the High-Priest praising the Holy Divine Actions sacrifices the most Divine Thing and taking and delivering the Divine Communion he ends with a Holy Thanksgiving Do nothing saith the Pseudo-Ignatius to Hero a Deacon of Antioch without the Bishops for they are Priests thou their Deacon they Baptize Sacrifice or Dispense the Lord's Supper impose Hands thou serves them as St. Stephen in Jerusalem administred to James and the Elders From which place it 's most evident that all Pastors or Priests as the Author speaks are true Bishops that on the account of such things as are common to all Pastors they receive the prime Episcopal Honour and Deference that there was a Colledge of true Bishops in the single City of Antioch accordingly that the rest of the Elders with James at Jerusalem were really true Bishops no less than he I don't say that Bishops and Congregations were reciprocal every-where in the fourth or fifth Century when these Impostors wrote only being to personat Apostolick Men they saw themselves obliged to mix into their Legends some shreds of true Antiquity The stuff they invented themselves was of a far different and contrary Mettal and far from being so conform and like to the Apostolick and prime Primitive Church § 14 And here it 's to be added that as every Bishop had once which continued in very many places for a good space one Congregation only so all Bishops whatsoever are of the same Dignity and Equal with one another For Cyprian calls all Bishops Collegues adding we force none we give Laws to none seeing every Governour in the Administration of the Church hath Power to do according to his own Will for which he is to give God an Acconnt And for none of us is a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Power can force his Collegues to Obedience c. And Hierome saith wheresoever Bishops be at Rome or Eugubium Constantinople Rhegium Alexandria or Tanis they are all of the same Dignity and Priest-hood Riches and Poverty make not a Bishop either higher or lower they are all the Successors of the Apostles Which is also Augustine's Mind and must be granted by all who acknowledge the Equality of the Apostles and that Bishops were their Successors Now the Truth of these two Things viz. the allowableness of a Bishop to every Congregation yea the primitive Reciprocalness of a Bishop and a Congregation and the Equality of Bishops among themselves being supposed which indeed is undoubtable to all the Ingenuous their whole Hierarchy turns to nothing And now I hope that which some pretend to be a mighty Prejudice viz. that Episcopacy still de facto has been and from the earliest times of Christianity we hear of Bishops is many ways removed and that by this time it has clearly appeared that either profound Ignorance Osscitancy or the masly beam of Interest in Mens Eyes has been the true Source of this Prejudice Moreover suppose that it could not be easily told when this Corruption which is like the Tares sown during the sleeping of the Husband-man crept into the Church Can they tell when all other Corruptions made their first Entry As for Example can they give a distinct account when the use of Oyl in Baptism whereof Tertullian speaks as of a thing constantly practised among Christians came first in Fashion The like I may say of Exorcization and many other things altogether uncertain as to their Beginning and yet by all Lovers of the Truth of Christianity to be Corruptions whereof see store in Chamier's Panstratia Secondly I trust also that by the foregoing Discourses the Weapon the Papists and other Hierarchicks use against the Reformed Churches to prove that they have no Ministers because of the want of a Succession of Bishops is sufficiently blunted And this minds me of an Objection I was assaulted with from a Gentleman of that Perswasion 't was that these Episcopal Men who ordained our Pastors gave them the Power of Ordination neither in express Terms nor yet intentionally Ergo not at all I Repon'd that tho' they did not give it them intentione Operantis yet notwithstanding intentione Operis in so much as they ordain'd the Ministers of the Gospel all whom we sustain to be true Bishops I add this is to a hair like Becan the Jebusites arguing against Luther's Call to be a Protestant-Minister Luther saith he had no lawfull Calling to the Ministry he exercised after his Defection for then he began to oppugn the Catholick Church abolish Feasts Monastick Vows and Prayers for the Dead these things he could not do by the Power which he had received in the Catholick Church for the Bishop who ordained him gave him no Power for the Destruction of the Church § 15. But there yet remains a great Prejudice and no wonder for it comes from a great City Rome say they and other such vast Cities which certainly contain'd many Congregations have been always ruled by their particular Bishops as the Catalogues yet extant evinc◠But tho' 't were so seeing it 's at least no less certain that in other places Bishops and Congregations were Reciprocal we are even with them and their Argument quite evanishes and Antiquity allows us to give a Bishop to every Congregation no less than it warrands their giving a multitude of Parishes to any one Bishop And Dr. Maurice acknowledges he never yet heard of any Man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under him And he 's so far in the right herein that during prime Antiquity 't was never so much as dream'd that 't was either essential or any way requisite for a Bishop to have a plurality of Congregations It 's not saith he the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes one a Bishop but the Order There are saith Saravia and have been Bishopricks so small that their Bishops had only one or two Presbyters for we measure not a Bishoprick by the number of the Clergy or by the amplitude of the City or Diocess the magnitude of Riches but by the Authority of the Episcopal Degree altho' the Bishoprick be included in one small Parish alone And some of the most Episcopal amongst them acknowledge that any of our Ministers tho' they have but one Parish want nothing to make them Bishops but only the Episcopal Consecration whereby they at once yeeld the whole Plea destroy their Hierarchy and withall discover their preterscriptural and therefore antiscriptural Superstition And now seeing there is all the warrant and allowance that either can be desir'd or thought on that a Bishop and a Pastor of one single Flock or Congregation is one and the same and that every Congregation may have its own proper Bishop their
Plea for the Distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter tho' its Ground were no less solide than it 's naught and slippery becomes really of no subserviency at all to their Hierarchick Cause and so on this account is truly exhausted for providing the Pastor of any Parish or Congregation be constantly imployed in Preaching and Edifying the People we shall not envy him others so far as is requisite to assist him the People may be instructed the better Don't therefore Dr. Maurice and the Men of that stamp while they pretend that tho' there be allowed to every Congregation its proper Bishop yet there 's a most different and momentuous Controversie behind about the Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter seek as the Proverb is a Knot in the Rush and triffle with a witness Give them moreover out of sole kindness that the Apostolick Power and Office is permanent and to be transmitted to all Bishops yet on Supposition of these Truths viz. that every Congregation had yea or may have its proper Bishop and that all Bishops are equal they shall be compelled to desert the whole of their Plea and acknowledge the sure Foundation and Lawfullness of what they call Presbyterian Parity Secondly Eusebius plainly says that it cannot be known who were the Successors of the Apostles to feed the Churches they had planted save what is to be collected from the words of the Apostles and so break the Chain at the Top where it should be strongest and shews that their best twisted Cords become Ropes of Sand to which as we already noticed the learn'dest of their own Writers subscribe Thirdly To come to Rome in particular altho' 't was the Head of the World and indeed the Head and Fountain from whence all the Hierarchicks draw their best support no Man of Reason whoever look'd into the divers yea and contrary Accounts given by the Ancients of the first pretended Successors of Peter can ever inferr that the Romans had in these early times of Christianity one peculiar Diocesan Bishop over the rest of the Pastors yea indeed Cletus Clemens Linus all whom if you compare the best Accounts they have you shall find to have been at one and the same time Bishops of Rome and Successors of Peter are a good evidence that he had no singular Successor at all This was so made out by the Protestant Writers that for ought I know the Romanists were despairing of any plausible Answer altho' I doubt not but they take Heart since some among the Protestants have used prodigious Endeavours to gratifie them and reconcile real Contradictions and fix the singular Successors of Peter I can scarce light on any of the Books they cite and yet I 'm at no great loss For 4 ly It 's certain that Peter was never at Rome which at once dispatches the grand Plea of all the Hierarchicks The whole stream of Writers who record Peter's Voyage thither either relate or suppose that his Errand was to oppose Simon Magus so that the Truth of both these Relations must stand or fall together But Simon Magus if we belive Origenes was never there Simon saith he the Smaritan and Majician endeavour'd by Sorcery to destroy some and I belive deceived many with his delusions But now throw all the World you shall scarce find thirty who follow him and I perhaps have called them more than they are Indeed there are some few in Palestine but in the rest of the Regions of the World his very Name is not heard off altho' he mainly desired that his Fame might be spread abroad and if perhaps there be any report of him at all it 's only to be learned from the Acts of the Apostles And Time which often has discovered things commonly taken for Truth to be altoger False hath verifi'd the words of Origenes For the Statue which gave the occasion of the fixion is now found to be the Image an old Sabin King or fictitious Deity called by the Romans Semo Sangus Sancus or Sanctus which Justine Martyr throw his unskilfulness of the Latine Tongue and a Cheat put upon him by some Samaritans took for Simon Magus as is acknowledged even by the learned Romanist Valesius The Inscription of this statue is Semoni Sango Deo Fidio Now according to the Genius of the Age the fraud prevail'd and Simon Magus must be brought to Rome made to effect monstruous Prodigies and therefore Simon Peter his old Adversary must also be sent thither to Conjure and Baffle him a second time And this is the prime Source of Peter's imaginary Journey to Rome and his fictitious Roman Episcopacy and the whole Papal Structure For as Simon Magus his coming to Rome is mention'd by none before Justine and by him only on this false Ground so Peter's Journey thither is before that time mention'd by none save Papias if he may be said to mention it for if at all he does it very obscurely And tho' he had been never so positive in this Matter it 's of small Consequence for as Eusebius already told us tho' elsewhere he forgets himself he was of so little Wit so fabulous and given to believe everything he heard that his Testimony merites little or no Credit Irenaeus indeed says that Papias was a hearer of the Apostles and himself also intimats so much but again clearly denyes it while he says that he used when he met with any who had been acquainted with the Elders to enquire what Andrew Peter Philip Thomas James John Matthew and the rest of Christ's Disciples had been wont to say And this he intimats had been his Practice only when he was a young Man and so gives us clearly to understand that when he wrote there was not one of the Hearers of the Apostles alive So far was Papias from being their Disciple 'T was he also who gives out that Mark wrote not his Gospel by Divine Inspiration but only by the help of his Memory 'T was he also who was the Father of the carnal and gross Chiliasts and the first who abused the Scriptures turning them all to Allegories and had not so much as the knowledge to distinguish Philip the Apostle from Philip the Evangelist The same Papias is the first Author of the report of Peter's Journey to Rome providing it may be said that he reportes it at all which mistake as Eusebius intimates flow'd from his misunderstanding of 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Church that is at Babylon c. And seeing that by Babylon in the Apocalyps Room is mean'd he and many of these times thro' their want of skill to distinguish between the Prophetick Mystick and Epistolick plain Phrase and Stile concluded that in Peter also Room is to be understood But this Gloss is so forraign and absurd that even the most learn'd of the Romanists as Petrus de Marca Bishop of Paris acknowledges that these Words of Peter are not to be
understood of Rome but of the eastern Babylon where saith the Bishop Peter was settl'd hereditary Patiark Some indeed understand them of a City bearing that name in Egypt and this Spanhemius F. and Dr. Pearson prefer to the Assyrian Babylon the former because the old Chaldean Babylon was then desolate the letter for this that after Anilaeus a chief man among the Jews in these parts had injured the Inhabitans many of them were cut off and the rest driven from Babylon who fled to Ctesiphon the most part whereof notwithstanding in a combination made against them by the Assyrians and Greeks were either cut off or expell'd Therefore he concludes that tho' Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision yet he could expect no harvest of the Jews in these parts Now as to the ground Spanhemius goes on it seems sufficient to prove that it could not be the old Chaldean Babylon For it 's certain from Scripture and Plinius witnesses that 't was then reduced to a solitude It seems therefore to be mean'd of the Principal City of the Parthian Impire which succeded to Babylon in name no less then in honour as is clear from that in Lucan Cumque superba foret Babylon spolianda Trophaeis Ausoniis If this their chief City was Ctesiphon or Seleucia may be a doubt Plinius calls Ctesiphon the Head of the Parthian Kingdom But Strabo seems to be more clear in this matter and to give light to Pliny Tacitus Herodianus Am. Marcellinus or otherwise to lay open the ground of their mistake Seleucia saith he a City by the bank of Tigris as Babylon was of old is now the Metropolis of Assyria near it there is a great Village Ctesiphon wherein the Parthian Kings used to winter sparing Seleucia that it might not be spoiled by the warlike Scythians by whom I understand their Auxiliary or guard Souldiers who were rude and ready to Mutany aud therefore were not brought within their Chief and Treasure City this Village is now arriv'd at even the power and greatness of a City Where as is evident he so much prefers Seleucia to Ctesiphon that he makes the former the chief City of the Impire Moreover Crassus when he design'd the conquest of Parthia and the possession of the Kings treasures being asked by the Messengers of Orodes King of Parthia why he broke the peace made with Pompey and Sylla said he would answer them at Seleucia proudly insinuating that he would subdue and spoile their chief City And this City expresly gets the name Babylon by Stephanus and he confounds it with the old Babylon Hence it appears that Seleucia was the chief City of the Parthian Impire and commonly then got the name of Babylon and that the very place of old Chaldean Babylon was not then known for they were certainly in distant places therefore if Josephus seem to mention another Babylon distant from the chief City of the Parthians this is rather to be understood of the Country Babylonia then of the old Chaldean Babylon which then was ruined now tho' the Jews for a time might be compelled to leave that principal City of Parthia they might notwithstanding soon after be permited to return no less then these who were expelled Rome by Claudius got Liberty shortly to come thither again This Dr. Pearson allows and therefore cannot deny the probability of the other However this be nothing is more certain then that by Babylon which Peter mentions the literal proper and well known Babylon which was then the chief City of Parthia Seleucia must be meaned otherwayes the dispersion to which he writes had neither known where he was nor what Church saluted them which is quite contrary to the Apostles Intention there For at that time the Apocalypse was not written and yet on this most false Supposition viz. that by Babylon Peter understands Rome was his Journey thither founded and so must prove no less false in the matter of fact and with it his Episcopacy and that of the earliest Popes his pretended Successors seeing all lean on his Journey thither And ' its with no less confidence and concord averred and delivered then is either his or his pretended Successors their Episcopacy or ought else Subsequent to this his falsly supposed Voyage And indeed the evidence of this our Assertion is so strong that it compell'd even the learned Romanists themselves to acknowledge the Truth thereof as J. Bapt. Mantuanus Michael Caefenas Marsilius Patavinus Joh. Aventinus Joh. Lelandus Car. Molinaeus who are Cited by Spanhemius F. in his Golden Dissertation on that Subject In the mean while I cannot but wonder how this otherways accurat and learned Antiquary finds an Aegyptian Babylon in that distick of Martial Haec tibi Memphitis Tellus dat munera victa est Pectine Niliaco jam Babylonis acus Th' Aegyptian slay gives Tapistry more fine Than ever Babylon could sue or spin Where the Poet only preferrs the Aegyptain woven Cloath to the finest needle-work of the old Chaldaean Babylon But as it is most apparent no more here either expesses or insinuats that there is a place named Babylon in Aegypt then where he comends a Gown bestow'd on him by Parthenius a gentle-man of Domitius's Chamber in this distick Non ego praetulerim Babylonica picta superbe Texta semiramiâ quae variantur acu It far excells the rich Embroideries Of Babylon built by Semiramis Moreover Clemens Romanus speaking of the Death of Peter and Paul intimates that he knew sufficiently where and by whom Paul was kill'd with other such Circumstances of his Death but insinuats that he had no such knowledge of any such Circumstances of the Death of Peter And it 's colligible from Jerome that both Peter and Paul were not kill'd by the Romans but by the Jews in or not far from Palaestine 'T were easie to discover the Forgerie and Falshood of their other Catalogues of Bishops pretended to have been in the like great Cities as for example that of the Bishops of Jerusalem whereof they fain that the Apostles made James Bishop and that on a ground to base and carnal viz. because he was the Son of Joseph and so related to Christ whom the Apostle Paul knew not according to the flesh 2 Cor. 5. 16. and then make him and his pretended successor Simeon to continue Bishops of that See from a little after the death of our Savior to I know not what year of Trajanus between which time and Adrian Trajanus's immediat successor his rebulding of Jerusalem they give to that Church thirteen Bishops to all of whom little more than twenty years can be assingn'd yea some three or four of these are cramm'd into one year and yet we hear of none of these thirteen who died a violent death but which yet more fully discovers the Forgery all along from the destruction of the City by Titus untill 't was rebuilt by Adrian there was
no Inhabitant there no place for my L. Bishop's grace nothing whereon to exercise the Episcopal power save rubbish and desolation In none of the Churches saith Dr. Stilling fleet most spoken of is the succession so clear as is necessary For at Jerusalem it seems somewhat strange how fifteen Bishops of the Circumcision should be crouded into so narrow a room as they are so that many of them could not have above two years time to rule in the Church And it would bear an inquiry where the seat of the Bishops of Jerusalem was from the time of the destruction of the City by Titus when the walls were laid even with the ground by Musonius till the time of Adrian I shall yet in the last place adduce a few passages and I intreat my Reader seriously to weigh them and from whom they came for I am sure they will give great light and satisfaction to all the truly conscientious and disinterested The sixt Anathematism saith a Romanist was much noted in Germany in which an Article of Faith was made of HIERARCHY which word and signification thereof is aliene not to say contrary to the holy Scrsptures and tho' 't was somewhat antiently invented yet the Author is not known and in case he were yet he is an Hyperbolicall Writer not imitated in the use of that Word nor of others of his Invention by any of the Ancients and following the Stile of Christ our Lord and the Holy Apostles and primitive Church it ought to be named not Hierarchy but Hierodiaconia or Hierodoulia And Dr. Heylen who like to Balaam blessing Israel when he would fainest have cursed them uses to establish a Presbyterian Parity of Pastors while he is most desirous to destroy it makes the Bishop in Justine Martyr ' s time all one with the President of the Congregation and ordinary Preacher of God's Word and Celebrator of the Eucharist therein And pleads that in Tertullian's mind Baptism was a work most proper to the Bishop in regard of his Episcopacy or particular Office And the Doctor contends out of Tertullian that in his time Christians receiv'd the Eucharist only from the Bishop's hands and so there were no fewer Bishops than Congregations who mett for hearing of the Word and Celebration of the Sacraments What shew of reason can be given saith Dr. Stilling-fleet why the Apostles should slight the Constitution of the Jewish Synagogues which had no dependance on the Jewish Hierarchy and subsisted not by any Command of the Ceremonial Law The Work of the Synagogue not belonging to the Priests as such but as Persons qualifi'd for instructing others And We are to take nottice that the Rulers of the Church under the Gospell do not properly succeed the Priests and Levites under the Law whose Office was Ceremonial and who were not admitted by any solemn Ordination into their Function It is then a common Mistake to think that the Ministers of the Gospell succeeded by way of Correspondence and Analogy to the Priests under the Law which Mistake hath been the Foundation and Originall of many Errors For when in the primitive Church the name of Priests came to be attributed to Gospell-Ministers from a fair Complyance as was thought then of the Christians only to the name used both among Jews and Gentiles in process of time corruptions increasing in the Church those names that were used by the Christians by way of Analogy and Accommodation brought in the things themselves primarily intended by these names so by the metaphoricall names of Priests and Altars at last came up the Sacrifice of the Mass without which they thought the names of Priests and Altars were insignificant This Mâ—stake we see run all along thro' the Writers of the Church as soon as the name Priests was apply'd to the Elders of the Church that they derived their Succession from the Priests of Aaroâ—'s Order In short he still contends that the model of Governing the Christian Church was an exact imitation of that of the Synagogues which were no other thing than the particular parish Churches among the Jews and in every one of which there was a a Bishop paralell to him who in the Apocalypse is the Angel of the Church And Dr. Lightfoot is of the same mind The Apostle saith he calleth the Minister Episâ—opus from the common and known title of the CHAZAN or Overseer in the Synagogue And Besides these there was the publick Minister of the Synagogue who pray'd publickly and took care about reading the Law and sometimes preached if there were not some other to discharge this Office This person was called SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church and CHAZAN HAKENESETH the Chazan or Bishop of the Congregation The Aruch gives the reason of the name The Chazan saith he is SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church or the publick Minister and the Targum renders the word ROVEH by the word HOSE one that oversees For it 's incumbent on him to oversee how the Reader reads and whom he may call cut to read in the Law The publick Minister of the Synagogue himself read not the Law publickly but every Sabbath he called out seven of the synagogue on other days fewer whom he judged fit to read He stood by him that read with great care observing that he read nothing either falsly or improperly and calling him back and correcting him if he had failed in any thing and hence he was called CHAZAN that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Bishop or Overseer Certainly the signification of the word Bishop and Angel of the Church had been determined with less noise if recourse had been made to the proper fountains and men had not vainly disputed about the signification of words taken I know not whence The service and worship of the Temple being abolished as being Ceremonial God transplanted the worship and publick adoration of God used in the synagogues which was moral into the Christian Church to wit the publick Ministry publick prayers reading God's Word and preaching c. Hence the names of the Ministers of the Gospel were the very same the Angel of the Church the Bishop which belonged to the Ministers in the synagogues There were also three Deacons or Almoners on whom was the care of the poor c. Among the Jews saith Dr. Burnet he who was the chief of the synagogue was called CHAZAN HAKENSETH the Bishop of the Congregation and SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church And the Christian Church being modelled as near the form of the synagogue as they could be as they retained many of the Rites so the form of the government was continued and the names remained the same And In the synagogues there was first one that was called the Bishop of the Congregation Next the three Orderers and Judges of every thing about the synagogue who were called TSEKENIM and by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
that is Elders These ordered and determined every thing that concern'd the synagogues or the persons in it Next them were the three PARNASSIN or Deacons whose charge was to gather the Collections of the rich and to distribute them to the poor All the Presbyters saith the Learned Le Moyne took not on them the burden of preaching and exponing the scriptures some were taken up in serving at the administration of the Sacraments searching into scandals visiting the sick strengthning the weak and providing for the Churches profit but the business of preaching belonged only to the Apostles the Bishops and the first Presbyters Hence in times of the ancient Church the Bishops perpetually preached which the inferior Presbyters did not except they were admitted thereto by the Bishops and chief Presbyters Most memorable to this purpose are the words of the learned Jesuite Sirmundus Anciently saith he the Bishops only and no others preached the word of God for this was their proper province and work 't was afterwards tho' not alike soon every where allowed to the Presbyters to preach this was soonest begun in the East as is clear from the practice of Pierius Chrysostome and others who preached while they were only Presbyters And now judge tho' nothing else had been adduced but what is just now brought from these profoundly learn'd and most unsuspected Arbiters if the Regimen and Way of the true primitive Church was not according to the Gospell Humility and Simplicity most opposite to a terrene Domination Prelaticall Grandor and Power over other Pastors and the vanity of preterscripturall and superstitious Ceremonies if she then enjoy'd not Bishops or Pastors Ruling Elders and Deacons if then whosoever had power to dispense the Word and Sacraments with the Charge of any particular Flock or Congregation was not reciprocally one and the same with a Bishop and finally if the primitive Way was not entirely one with that of our Church of Scotland and others of the reformed Churches which is now known by the name of Presbytry Hence it 's carefully to be noted how odd and grievous Alterations were made both as to the use of Terms and in the Offices they had primitively signifi'd in Scripture In yea even after the Apostolick Age we find that the word Bishop whereever it holds forth an ordinary Church-Officer alwayes signifying a Labourer in the Word and Doctrine and Dispenser of the Srcraments Pastor of a Flock or Congregation We find also the Word Presbyter taken as its equivalent denoting this very thing elsewhere as is now made evident the word Presbyter signifies no Pastor of a Flock but only one who was to assist him in Ruling and Guidance thereof some also of this latter kind of Presbyters designing the Ministry there beeing then few or no Theological Schools were trained up for the Office under the Inspection of Bishops or Parochial Pastors and accordingly whiles assisted them therein But this was only accidental to the Office of a ruling Presbyter Afterward there was a new kind of Church Office invented whose chief work was not to feed any Flock or Congregation and yet was reputed the Pastor of many Flocks which was a compleat Contradiction His Province was mainly to rule and domineer over a multitude of both Pastors and Flocks him they called the Bishop Another Office epually new and unknown to Scripture and prime Antiquity was a kind of semipastor or half Minister who was to do all the Ministeriall Work and yet was so far from having any Pastorall Power that on the contrary he was only the subject and substitute of another and him they called the Presbyter As for the other sort of Presbyters they came in time to be well nigh intirely abolished and forgotten The like Chrysostome observes of the Deacons saying that in his time such Deacons as the Apostles ordained were not in the Church Hence it 's not strange if the Ancients while sometimes they violent the Scriptures to make them favour what in their oun times was obtaining and at other times while either out of design and freedome or casually they light on the true Meaning of the Scriptures speak most perplexedly of Bishops and Presbyters and afford no small ground of Wrangling and Disputation to all that are exercised in this Controversy In the mean while such Immutation was not made in a day 't was sloe and apparently plausible like the weed which at lenth you may see that it is groun up yet its act of growing ye shall never perceive This Alteration as even Spanhemius F. no enemy to the Hierarchy observes began first in great Cities and beside the generall occasions or rather pretexts for it which we already noted there was this colour more peculiar to great Cities in Rome for example tho there were Christians sufficient to make up severall ordinary Congregations yet at some special times all or most of these used to meet at one place and accordingly were accounted but one Church This might occasion the making of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or one particular Moderator among the Pastors who got some primacy of Order and at these more solemn meetings of the People appeared spake most and in time got the appropriation of the name Bishop all this was notwithstanding only a meer prostasy he must nixt have a power over his Collegues in the City the Bishops the parochial Pastors of the Country and lesser Cities are next to be invaded This Fermentation which had small beginnings and still grew untill all was soured suelled especially and was most operative in a time of peace whereof in the third Century they had a good space even from the Death of Valerian untill Dioclesian's Persecution The Emperors themselves saith Eusebius then so much favoured them that they not only gave them Liberty of the publick Exercise of their Religion but also made some of them their Chamberlains and Governours of Provinces In this time the alteration of both Government and Worship was certainly not a litle promoved For nothing then reign'd among the Christians but contention ambition They were not content continous he with the former Edifices but builded large Churches from the foundation But when thro' too much liberty we fell into sloath and negligence when every one began to envy and backbite another when we managed as 't were an intestine warr amongst our selves with Words as with Swords Pastors against Pastors and People against People being dashed one on another exercised flrife and tumult when deceit and Guile had grown to the highest pitch of wickedness When being void of all sense we did not so much as once think how to please God yea rather on the other hand impiously we imagined that human Affairs are not at all guided by Divine Providence we dayly added Crimes to Crimes when our Pastors having despised the Rule of Religion strove mutually with one another studying nothing more then how to outdoe one another in strife
threatning Emulation Hatred and mutual Enmity proudly usurping Principalities or Prelacys as so many places of Tyrannicall Domination To this time doubtless did the Nicene Fathers look in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ancient Customes that they mention which will be denyed by none who remember that even things of a very late date used then to be called ancient and which is yet more they were wont to pretend Apostolick Authority and Tradition for every one of their Innovations For this their Pride and Superstition and such Vices God sent a long and most grievous Persecution after which it might have been reasonably thought they would have returned to the Humility and Simplicity of the Gospell and Apostolick Age. But so far were they from this that the Gangren began faster than ever to consume the Vitals of Chrsitianity and having got a Christian Emperor to indulge and enrich them they quickened their Pace and in the gadiness of Pride and giddiness of Superstition extravaging without bounds in this Declension they piece and piece laid aside the Scripture and in the model of their Government and Worship eyed and followed three patterns the Jewish Policy Ceremonies and Temple where there was one High-Priest the magnificent and splendid Government of the Roman Empire over which there was one Head one Emperor And lastly the way of the Roman Pagan Priests in which there was also at Rome a Pontifex Maximus or High-Priest over all the many Degrees of Priests in the Empire and so in process of time it came to pass that he who by his first Institution was design'd to be a Pastor of a Flock or Congregation and to imitate the Apostolick Simplicity and Humility turned to be the great Antichrist the son of Perdition and grand Emissary and Lieutennant of the red Dragon and these who were ordain'd to be his Fellow-Pastors and Ministers of the Gospel became his Underlings and Slaves in that Apostacy and being martial'd into a thousand Ranks and Orders proved so many Squadrons of hellish Locusts so that scarce in any part of the Creation of God was there ever a more sad and direfull Depravation if it were not when our first Parents fell into the Cloutches of the old Serpent or when the Sons of God became his greatest Enemies and those morning Stars the beautifull Angels turned into infernal Firebrands black and abominable Devils Most observable notwithstanding yea and adorable is Divine Providence in this that even in the growth and increase of this black Apostacy the Church in Opinion and Doctrine at least still held fast the great and capital Articles of Christianity as the sufficiency of the Canonicall Books of Scripture the Doctrine of the holy Trinity of free Grace of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood c. Their great sin lay not in the Defect but in the Excess by superadding to these golden Foundations a heap of hay and stuble the wild Fancies of Apostatising Brains And in process of time equalizing yea and preferring them to these Divine and most necessary Truths comprehended in the Books of the Old and New Testament Then it was when tho' they still acknowledged the Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor of a Congregation they must among'st the rest of their novell Foppereis raise one Bishop or High-Priest as they spoke over a number of other Pastors and Churches whose Ordination and Consecration must be accompani'd with a dale of Alloy suitable to this their humane and unwarrantable Institution He must have a Cudgell put in his hand to signifie his Rule and Authority over the People and a Ring to signifie his Pontifical Honour and the hidden Mysiereis wherewithall he is intrusted The Bishop being consecrated shaven and anointed it was his proper Work and Office to erect and consecrate Churches to make their Chrism or Holy Oyl For the Art of Besmearing was pretty early in the Church no later at least than their Diocesan and therewith to anoint the forehead Eyes and Ears of the Baptized to receive the Penitents and perform such greasy businesses about them These and the like Actions were reserved as the special Ornament and Badges of the High-Priest's Honour And indeed hitherto they acted congruouly for 't was but meet that their own Antichristian Inventions the Institution whereof never came into God's mind should be appropriated to their own Church-Officer whom God never appointed Caetera conveniunt sed non levis error in uno est For they debased and polluted God's Ordinance I mean the Ordination of Pastors which they threw in among their Trash and left likewise to their Bishop or High-Priest as a part of his peculiar Province Superstitionists sometimes for such Fooleries deprave the Scripture which Dr. Lightfoot one of the learn'd est of the Church-of England Divines observes and baffles Here saith he Episcopacy thinketh it hath an undenyable Argument for Proof of its Hierarchy and of the strange Rite of Confirmation c. And this is very like another Practice for Antiquity also not a white lower than their Diocesan they made another fixed Church-Officer whom they called an Exorcist His Office was to dispossess and cast out Devils Now surely such an ordinary Church-Officer was never appointed by God and therefore 't is most likely that some of those Exorcists needed some to have casten the Devils out of themselves or at least to have giv'n them a a round doze of Hellebore no less then did any of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Patients But seeing they made such a Church-Officer and the dispossessing of Devils was among'st the greatest and most miraculous Works that ever was practis'd even by the greatest Apostles It may be thought that this Exorcist was one of their highest Church-Officers a Metropolitan certainly Arch-Bishop or Patriarch but he was none of these yea he was no Bishop no Presbyter no Deacon no Sub-Deacon yea not so much as an Acolyth that is a Candle-carier for they us'd in fair-day-light and Sun-shine to light Candles in the Church to obey and fulfill as they said that Scripture John 1. 9. That was the true Light which lighteneth every Man that cometh into the World This Exorcist was yet a degree lower than their Candle-Carier and therefore was plac'd in the very rear and tail of all their Clergy So dangerous yea and unaccountable were many of their Actings but especially in the matter of Church-Office-bearing Moreover I appeal to all the judicious and conscientious if out of a conscientious desire of conforming to the primitive Church our Adversareis make such a horride noise bussle and Schism for their Hierarchy For suppose it to be as true as I hope by this time to all the unbyassed it 's manifested to be false that in all points they could vouch their Hierarchy to be warranted by the true primitive Church and the Government of the one intirely like that of the other yet do they not desert her in many other things
Did the primitive Church use Organs in Divine Worship Were they not first introduced in the seventh Century by Pope Vitalian And yet it is doubtfull if they were so soon received For Aquinas dislikes and condemns them Or where pray in the true primitive Church shall they find the Surplice Corner-Cap and Tippet Or where to name no more shall they find the Bishop allowed to involve himself in secular cares Civil and State Offices or Imployments Some used indeed when they pleased the Christian Emperor allowing it to make the Bishops Arbiters of their private Debates but to all the good Bishops as Augustine complains this was a most weighty Grievance But in more early times even this was not permitted for Cyprian condemns as altogether unlawfull that any Church-man should be so much as a testamentary Tutor to any Pupil And mark the ground he goes on For saith he whosoever are honoured with the Divine Priest-Hood or have a place in the Clergy ought only to serve at the Altar and spend their time in Prayer and Supplication For 't is written no Man that warreth intangleth himself with the Affairs of this Life that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a souldier Thâ—â— is such a clear and inevitable Condemnation of the Practice of the Hierarchicks that the Learned Annotators Pamelius and the Bishop of Oxford finding nothing wherewith to elude it skipp it over with deep silence And now judge if Cyprian was of one mind with the Bishop of Five Churches who will have the meaning of Paul's words cited by Cyprian to be that every Christian ought to abstain from those things which are repugnant to Christian Profession which are sins only and will not have the Apostle to speak any thing of Church-men in particular or if Cyprian would have expon'd the sixth of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles as doth Heylyn who makes the Canon only to mean that Bishops or inferiour Clergy-Men might not be Consuls Praetors Generals or undergoe such publick Offices in the State of Rome as were most sought for and esteemed by the Gentiles there Heylen is here somewhat intricat and his cause required it However the sum of his drift is that the exercising of these or the like Offices is allowed to any Pastor by the Canon Now altho' ' tallowed it not when the Empire was Pagan and he would prove something of this kind from 1 Cor. 6. where he must count all Magistrats thro' the Christian World Pagans and Unbelievers for otherways none shall ever prove from this Scripture so much as the lawfullness of a Bishop or Pastors judging and determining any difference between any two that referr themselves to his Arbitration And tho' he should prove it pray what is this to the exercising the Office of Consul General Praetor Chancellour Treasurer or the like pieces of such temporal Power and Grandor Judge moreover were there no more but Paul his words to Timothy 1. 4 13 14 15. And 2 Tim. 4. 2 5. If there be Leasure left any Pastor to be either Consul General or ought else of this nature and consequently if all the shifts they use on this head be not sufficiently overthrown by these Scriptures only But I had almost forgotten to notice how they torment themselves that they may torment and detort Cyprian For Saravia says that the Canon Cyprian speaks off was but particular and provincial only for the Church of Carthage But Heylen refutes Saravia his comment and says Cyprian spoke so because the Church was then almost destitute and unprovided of Presbyters As if Cyprian had not spoken of Chruch-men absolutely and without the least intimation of any such restriction and grounded his saying on a Scripture which whatsoever it speaks of Church-men confessedly says it of the mall be they many or few or in whatsoever time and place they live Moreover it 's most certain that in Matthew 20. 25 26 27 28. The Princes of the Gentiles c. And Mark 10. 42 43 44 45. And Luke 22. 25 26 27. All Pastors of Flocks are prohibited to exercise Dominion secular and state Dignity and a parity of the Apostles amongst themselves and in them a parity of all ordinary Pastors or Ministers of the Gospell among themselves is enjoyned D. M. pretends to engage with the latter part of this Inference but first he mis-states the question as if from these Texts we pleaded for a perfect equality of all the Officers of Christs house without distinction between extraordinary and ordinary Ministers or between Pastors and other Officers and so his saying that the Apostles exercised Jurisdiction over other Ecclesiasticks whether true or false is nothing to the purpose But saith D. M. Our blessed Saviour supposeth degrees of Subordination amongst his own Disciples as well as other societies and therefore he directs the Ecclesiasticks who would climb up to the highest places in the Church to take other methods then these that are most usual amongst the Grandees of the World He that deserved preferment in the Church was to be the servant of all Which answer he steals from the Jesuite Bellarmine who answers that Christ only directs ecclesiastick Princes teaches that as such they ought to rule their subjects not as do Kings and Lords but as Fathers and Pastors To whom Junius replyes that all this is quite contrarie to both Christs words and scope The sons of Zebedie saith he desired a Dominion this Christ rejects and refuses to give them again the falshood of this answer is demonstrated positively by Christs following words who in stead of this Dominion which they desired enjoyns them a humble Ministry and Service Wherefore there is a clear opposition between Dominion and Ministry the former belonging the World the latter to the Church Bishops are not saith Bellarmine here forbidden to exercise a dominion like that of godly Kings but only like that of Tyrranical Kings who know not God We deny replyes Junius that there is any such restriction neither can it be proved And accordingly Junius refutes and bafles all the Sophistrie that Bellarmine and after him our Prelatists ordinarly bring to prove that only tyrrany and not all sort of principality or superiority is by our Saviour in these Texts prohibited And with Junius joyns the whole stream of Protestant Writers But our Saviour saith D. M. did that himself among them which he now commanded them to do to one another and therefore the doing of this towards one another in obedience to the command now under consideration could not inferr a Parity unless that they blasphemously infer that Christ and his Apostles were equal For our Saviour recomends what he enjoyns from his own constant and visible practice among them viz that he himself who was their Lord and Master was their sevant and therefore it becomes the greatest among them in imitation of him to be modest calm and humble towards all their
subordinate Brethren A sturdy argument forsooth as if our most blessed Master to quell his Disciples their ambition of aspiring to a preheminence over one another and to render them more content with a humble and brotherly parity could not adduce and urge his own most holy and meek example of his most wonderful condescending to take upon him the form of a Servant and do the works of a Servant among his Apostles and that so humblie as if he had been only their Companion and nothing above them but he must anone be concluded to degrade and throw down himself into a meer equality with his Disciples Can any in the exercise of his wit make such a Collection Neither can better befall him for as is his constant practice this wretched Paralogism he also borrows from another Jebusite Cornelius a Lapide who at the same rate depraves this Text of Matthew to save from a mortal blow Peter's fictitious Primacy But in the next place which is little better D. M. turns Jew on our hand Let it be further considered saith he that the Hierarchy and Subordination of Priests was established by Divine Authority in the Jewish Church and if our Saviour had pulled down that ancient Polity and commanded an equality among the Presbyters of the New Testament he would not have stated the Opposition between his own Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles but rather between the Priests of the Mosaic Oeconomy and the Disciples of the New Testament And agian fearing least his Jâ—daism and also his self-repugnancy should not have otherways been apparent enough We do not saith he now plead as some ignorant People may pretend that there ought to be a Bishop above Presbyters because that there was a High-Priest among the Jews but rather thus that the Hierarchy that obtained in the Patriarchal and Jewish Oeconomy was never abrogated in the new Well then is there on Earth a visible High-Priest over the whole Church the Levitical Orders Rites Temple-service the very things wherein the Jewish Hierarchy consisted and shadows of Christ to come now allowable But to come to his cavill and quiet this child of Ignorance D. M. should know that beside the Disciples ambition to get up over one another according to the carnal apprehension they then entertained of Christ kingdome wherein our Hierarchick Lord Bishops are the Apostles successors indeed and all Hierarchicks men of Apostolick principles they looked also for a great worldly and civil power and dominion which was not at all comprehended in the Jewish Priesthood nor was then possessed by any of the Priests and so our Lord 's stateing the opposition between his Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles is by far more apt for his purpose than if he had stated it between them and the Priests of the old Oeconomy which had been altogether lame and doon scarce the half of his bussiness In a word the Romishness and Falshood of all these his Cavills is manifest were there no more from this only that if they do any thing they make for the defence of that new Romish Doctrine of Peter's Supremacy which both the Fathers and all sound Protestants not only Presbyterians but also Episcopals yea some that otherwise deserve not the name of Protestants as Dr. Heylen explode prove that there was a compleat Equality Parity amongst the Apostles And they deduce their Conclusion especially from this text of Matthew's Gospel and its parallels And indeed if there be as doubtless there are any places of Scripture fit to prove it these texts deservedly hold the first place The Author of the Opus imperfectum thought by some to be Chrysostome saith on this place of Matthew Quicunque autem desiderat primatum in terrâ inveniet confusionem in coelo Whosoever desires a primacy on Earth shall find Confusion in Heaven Now suppose the truth of these words and compare them with the words of the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. 1. If a man desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good work And it 's clear the Office of a Bishop is quite another thing than a Primacy for to desire the former is lawfull and laudable but to desire the latter is dangerous and damnable and so much by the way for I love not to transcribe the labours of others And so angry is D. M. at New Opinions and for their sake at every thing that 's New that he scarce ever advances any Argument Vindication or Defence but what is so frequently and soundly baffl'd so bare and worn as to vy even with the old ancient Garments of the Gibeonites These Texts as I said prohibite also all Pastors of Flocks to exercise Dominion Secular or State Dignities which is irrefragably made out by our Writers against Bellarmine de Pontifice and other Romanists However 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either the Possession or Hope of such Emoluments and Dignities as also the glistering gayetie of gorgious and theatrick Ceremonies close mens mouths and keep them from acknowledging the Truth for which even a Pagan may come in to reprove them O curvae interris animae coelestium inanes Quid juvat hoc templis nostros immittere mores Et bona Dijs ex hac scelerata ducere pulpa Dull earthy minds who know no heavenly thing What profites it into the Church to bring Our own Inventions or to dream that we Can with Lust's fewel please the Deity Dicite Pontifices in sancto quid facit aurum Speak out your minds ye Priests and do not lie Can gold your holy places sanctifie It 's an old saying that the Church brought forth Riches but the Daugter devoured the Mother who when she had wooden Cups she had golden Priests but afterward she got golden Cups and wooden Priests Even their Pseudo-Clement is prolix on this subject exhorting the Bishop to be dis-engaged of all worldly cares and affairs and perpetually imploy'd in Preaching and Prayer and the like Ministerial duties And indeed all Pastors of Flocks would carefully abstain from secular and state Offices and every thing else that may abstract them from their Charges and Flocks least their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 procure them Functius's reward But if our Hierarchicks will not hear our blessed Lord and his Apostles if they will not hear the genuine writtings of the Ancients nor yet these spurious pieces whose Authros were otherwayes sufficiently Hierarchick and Ceremonious I think they might listen to the Bishop af Aiace for he was a Member of the Council of Trent John Baptista Bernard saith Suave Bishop of Aiace who thâ— he believed that residencie was de jure Divino yet thought it not fit to speak of that question delivered a singular speech saying that not aiming to establish one Opinion more then another but only so to inforce residency as that it may be really executed he thought it vain to declare from whence the obligation came or whatsoever else and
that it was sufficient only to remove the cause of Absence which is that Bishops do busie themselves in the courts of Princes and in the affairs of the World being Judges Chanchellours Secretaries Counsellours Treasurers and there are but few Offices of state into which some Bishop hath not insinuate himself This is forbidden by St. Paul who thought it necessary that a Souldier of the Church should abstain from secular Employments Let God's command be executed and them forbidden to take any Charge Office or Degree ordinary or extraordinary in the affairs of the World and then their being no cause for them to remain at Court they will go to their residencie of their own accord without Command or Penalty and will not have any occasion to depart from thence In conclusion he desired that the Council could constitute that it should not be lawfull for Bishops or others who have care of souls to exercise any secular Office or Charge But all this was in vain for that Synagogue of Sathan was deaf like the Adder the Bishop of Five Churches who harang'd to the contrary eluded or neglected all his reasons telling the Council withall that if Aiace were follow'd their Church would anon become base contemptible was heard with applause of the the whole Conventicle tho' not without a self-contradiction as the Historian observes so that this ingenuous and Christian Discourse was slighted and contemned Neither can I find much ground to expect any fairer treatment from men of a Tridentine Spirit whose strenth lyes mostly in mean sophistry and unmanly snatching at colours and shaddous disimulation of the unsoundness of their Cause banter and Hectoring noise and ill founded claims to Antiquity From these I may look for unkind handling indeed but withall have some assurance to meet with better dealling from all the Admirers and Students of most true and only unspotted Antiquity the sacred Scripturers whom God hath quicken'd by his Precepts who know that serious and assiduous Meditation in God's Law and keeping his Precepts will make them understand more than even the Ancients and therefore rejoyce in the Way of his Testimonies as much as in all Riches and esteem the Words of his Mouth more than their necessary food to whom these are the Joy and Rejoyceing of their heart These I am somewhat confident will not be much displeased with what I have said My Antagonist if any happen or I 'm exceedingly mistaken will be of quite different Qualities I can sincerely affirm that I have not willingly or wittingly injured the Truth or any man's person and that the Love of sacred Verity moved me to publish these papers Others doubtless of suitable Abilities may soon advance things of far greater worth than what can come from we whose mite is so mean and inconsiderable and who beside the other disadvantages that environ me according to the good Pleasure of him that doth all things well from the very womb have laboured under the want of that noble Sence of SEEING and so am oblig'd to read with the Eyes and write with the Hands of others Yet tho' I be deprived of the sweet Light and pleasure of beholding the Sun it little moves me if so be I may see the infinitely more precious Light of the most glorious and dear SON of Righteousness and be illuminated and enlyven'd with that all healling Vertue which is in his Wings FINIS a Judgement given forth c. Page 12. b Ibid. c The Trial of Peter Boss c. Page 6. d Plea for the Innocent Page 12. e Pag. 11. f More Divisions amongst the Quakers Page 15. g Judgement given forth c. Page 17. and Append. to the History of the Quakers Pag. 16. h Ibid. pag. 12. i ibid. pag. 17. k ibid. pag. 20. l Inter Epist Augustini 25. m Adversus Hermâ—oâ—enem n De Doctrinâ— Christiana Lib. 2. Cap. 9. o Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. Lib. 1. Cap. 7. Hist. Tripâ—rtit Lib. 2. Cap. 5. p Lib. 5. q Epist. ad Pompejum r In Acta Apost Homil. 3. s In primum Haggaei a Iren. lib. 2. Caput 11. b Synop. pap conti 5. Quest. 3. Part 2. c Preface to his Ecclesiastical Policy p. 2. 19. and 20. d P. 131. e In Iren. f Apologiae Cathol lib. 1. p. 118. 119. 120. h Defence of the Apology of the Church of England pag. 121. i page 248. k Stillingfleet Iren. pag. 392. l Iren. pag. 393. m pag. 395. n Episcopacy not prejudicial to regal Power Page 13 14 15. b Canon 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Detection of the Court and State of England Vol. 1. Page 361. e Vol. 1. Pag. 361. d Pag. 368. f Memoires of the D. of Hamiltoun Pag. 29. 30. h Nalson's Collections Vol. 1. Page 247. i Memoires Page 29. k Hist. Page 447 453. l Memoires Page 47. alibi m Memoires Page 60. n Collections Vol. 1. Page 245. i Memoires Page 235 236. a De pontif Rom lib. 1. cap. 8. Praeterea exercitus non semper unum habet ducem c. a De pontif Rom. Lib. 2. Cap. 10. Nulla enim in Ecclesia Dei graviora excitata sunt Schismata nec Hereses exorta sunt ab ullo tetriores quam ab Episcopis a Iren. Part 2. Chap. 6. a De Repub. Ecclesiasticâ Lib. 2. Cap. 4. Numb 46. Sunt qui Hieronymum in rectam sententiam vel invitum velint trahere neque in hoc aut excusari satis potest aut c. b De diversis gradibus ministrorum Evangelii Cap. 23. Dico privatam fuisse Hieronymi opinionem consentaneam cum Aërio c. c Ibid. 27. d Exam. tract de triplici Episcopatû Page 25. e Ibid. Page 34. f Contra Hereses fol. 103. B. Sed revera fallitur Thomas Waldensis quoniam in toto illo decursu pâ—st verba proximè citata nihil aliud conatur Hieronymus quam ut ostendat ex Divina Institutione non esse differentiam inter Presbyterum Episcopum Et fol. 104. D. Nec etiam mirari quisquam debet quod Beatus Hieronymus Vir alioqui doctrissimus sic deceptus fuerit c. g De Cler. Cap. 15. Michaël Medina affirmat sanstum Hieronymum idem omnino cum Aërianis sensisse neque solum Hieronymum in ea Heresi fuisse sed etiam Ambrofium Augustinum Sedulium Primasium Chrysostomum Theodoretum OEcumenium Theophilactum atque ita inquit Medina isti Viri aliâ—qui Sanctissimi Sacrarum Scripturarum consultissimi quorum tamen sententiam prius in Aërio deinde in Waldensibus postremo in Johanne Vvicklefo damnavit Fcclesia Et infra Ergo in Hieronymo Gracis illis Patribus c. h Catechism tract 2. Quest. 23. i Cath. Orth. Tom. 1. Page 286. k Heresi 55. five 75. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l De repub eccles Lib. 2. Cap. 5. m Epistola ejus dedicatiora translationi suae praefixa n Critic Patrum Page 330. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Office not upon Jus Dominicum the Law of God in the Scriptures but Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem the practice of the Church Add hereto that both Fathers and Councils equally in Opinion and Practice stuck no less to the lawfulness of Patriarchat than that of simple Episcopacy and yet I believe few among real Protestants will either assert the Divine Right of this Office of Patriarchat i. e. that it had any Warrant for it in the Word of God or yet that those Fathers and Councils so believed Which present Consideration furnisheth us with another Argument sufficient to evince that the ancient Châ—rch founded this Office only upon Custom and as they thought Christian Prudence and not at all upon the Books of the Old and New Testament § 2. Neither do the most Learned of the Modern Episcopals in the least swerve from this Opinion amongst whom I reckon D. Forbes who having for a while with the greatest tenderness and fear handled this Matter propones at length the Question If Episcopacy be of Divine Right And yet declares himself highly difficultated what to Answer for absolutly deny it he will not and positively assert it he dares not he therefore confounds it with a Synodical Moderatourship and then fairly tells us that it is of Divine Right because of the general Scripture-Precepts of Church-Order and Decency And indeed he carries himself all along in this Matter with so much nice Caution Ambiguity and Fear that he evinces the desperation of the Episcopal Cause to which so learned a Man could afford no better Defence than really to destroy what he pretends to vindicat Neither is the most Learned Bishop Vsser of another mind who has reduced it to a meer shadow and nonentity And Willet though he says that a difference is needfull for Church-Policy yet affirms that this cannot be proved by the Word of God and that in the Apostles times a Bishop and Presbyter were neither in Name nor Office distinguished And he at large answers all Bellarmine's Arguments to the Contrary See the Appendix to the second part of the forecited Question Of this same Judgement is their applauded Hooker viz. that there is no ground for their Hierarchy in the word of God while he declares himself against all particular Forms of Church-government and acknowledges that nothing for Diocesan Prelacy can be brought therefrom The necessity of Policy saith he and regimen in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain Form to be necessary in them all And the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry Forms of Discipline may be equally consonant unto the general Axioms of Scripture It hath been told them that Matters of Faith and in general Matters necessarie unto Salvation are of a different Nature from Ceremonies Order and the kind of Church-Government that the one are necessar to be expresly contained in the Word of God or else manifestly collected out of the same the other not so that it is necessarie not to receive the one unless there be something in Scripture for them the other free if nothing be alledged against them And the Learned D. Stilling fleet is at no smal pains to cashier and expunge among the rest of peculiar Forms of Government This Diocesan Prelacy out of Scriptural-Articles and not only acknowledges but also musters not a few Arguments whereby to Prove that it hath no Ground in Holy Scripture And Dr. Morton Though a zealous Defender of Episcopacy Asserts that Hierome made not the Difference between Bishop and Presbiter of Divine Institution he assâ—nts to Medina the Jesuite and asserts that there was no Difference in the matter of Episcopacy betwixt Hierome and Aerius He averres further that not only the Protestants but also all the primitive Doctors were of Hierome ' s mind And finally he concludes that according to the Harmonious Consent of all Men in the Apostolick Age there was no Difference between Bishop and Pesbyter but was afterward introduced for the removal of Schism And Jewel Bishop of Sarisburie a Man for Piety and Ability Second I am sure to few that ever filled an Episcopal Chair most expresly asserts the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter Here saith he Mr. Harding findeth great fault for that I have translated these words ejusdem Sacerdotii of the same Bishoprick and not as he would have it of one Priesthood God wott a very simple Quarrel Let him take whether he listeth best if either-other of these words shall serve his turn Erasmus saith id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter these three Names viz. Bishop Priest and Presbyter at that time were all one And but what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests or Presbyters and Bishops Thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition Or is it so horrible an Heresie as he maketh it to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all one Or knoweth he how far and unto whom he reacheth the Name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Inter Episcopum Presbyterum interest ferme nihil between a Bishop and a Priest which is all one with Presbyter in a manner there is no difference St. Hierome saith somewhat in a rougher sort Audio Quendam c. I hear say there is one become so Peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops be all one Thus far Jewel The Bishops and Priests saith the famous Bishop Cranmer were at one time and were not two things but both one Office in the beginning of Christ's Religion And In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or a Priest needeth no Consecration by the Scripture for Election or Appointing thereto sufficient In the same MS. saith Dr. Stillingfleet it appears that the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox were all of the same Opinion with the Arch-Bishop that at first Bishops and Presbyters were the same and the two latter expresly cite the Opinion of Jerome with Approbation Thus we see by the Testimony chiefly of him who was Instrumental in Our Reformation that he owned not Episcopacy as a distinct Order from Presbytry but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrat for the better governing in the Church And having proved that Whitgift and with him the whole Body of the English Episcopal Divines were of the same Judgement thus concludes By which Principles the Divine Right of Episcopacy as founded upon Apostolical Practice is quite subverted and destroyed Now judge if Dr. Sandersone spoke not without the allowance ye acontrary to the express Mind of his Brethren when he says that the Difference among the Advocats for Episcopacy is only Verbal and that all of them even those who yeeld that it is not of Divine Right no less
Opinions plead for some Charity from all that well consider the most dismal and dangerous Age wherein he lived § 12. But let him be an Arrian blacker than Arrius himself it will be hard thence to draw any Conclusion concerning Aërius For First Basil in the forecited place tells us that Eustathius was so cunning as to perswade the ablest of these times that he was Orthodox and why might he not then put a Cheat on his own Presbytry Secondly Eustathius as is related was much given to Covetousness and altho' Epiphanius carri'd out with Passion for his Innovations justifies and praises him that he may reach a harder Blow to Aërius yet this his Avarice was one of the Grounds wherefore Aërius as he professeth deserted Eustathius and this I think is no less to be believ'd than ought else we have from Epiphanius uncharitably at least wresting both his Words and Actions And it is not improbable that he who had the Conscience to dislike Eustathius for his Vices might do no less on the account of his Errors Thirdly Aërius was priviledg'd by God with both eyes to perceive and courage to oppose the unwarranted Festivals superstitious Fasts Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and other such then growing Dottages notwithstanding that they were so kindly imbrac'd by most Christians Now I believe that hardly an Instance can be adduc'd of any who set himself in Opposition to the whole World by condemning such growing Corruptions and attempting at least to stop the beginnings of Anti-christianism and yet fell into this damnable Heresie wherewith they brand Aërius I hope therefore that henceforth all true Protestants shall inlarge their Charity and be more backward to join with Romanists in bespattering the memory of him who did amongst the first declare his Detestation of the leaven of Romanism § 13. Had any thing written by Aërius come unstain'd to our hands I doubt not but we had got a far other account of his Creed and Doctrine but the Zeal of these Innovatours prompted them to make all Opposers of their Fopperies grand Hereticks and fasly stigmatize Truth 's Witnesses with what really deserved that name and then overwhelm'd them with Calumnies and gave their Writings to the Flames for a Repository This was the Fate of Vigilantius Claudius Taurinensis and others of whose Writings nothing except some mangl'd and deprav'd scrapes found in the bitter Invectives of their most partial and disingenous Adversaries remains § 13. The Aërians are also remembred by Philastrius They are so named saith he from Aërius they give themselves to abstinences and live mostly in Pamphilia they are also callâ—d Encratites i. e. Abstinents They possess nothing They abhore Meats which God with his Blessing hath bestow'd on Mankind They condemn moreover lawfull Marriage alledging that it 's not of God's Institution Thus Philastrius § 14. But to me it is not probable that any who deni'd and despis'd all their Lent-seasons Xerophagies wherein nothing was eaten but dry Bread and such rigorous Fasts and restraints were ever addicted to Encratitick abstinences whereby all use of Wine Flesh and other such Delicacies was probihited Secondly Epiphanius makes the Encratits and Aërians quite contrary Sects to one another who sustained quite contrary Doctrines and Practices for according to him the former ate no living Creature nor drank Wine Which is also Attested by Eusebius and Irenaeus The latter Epiphanius according to his custom of turning all the Aërians their Practices into Crimes will have to be excessive Gormandizers and but to liberal to themselves in both Flesh and Wine so far was he from joining with Philastrius in ascribing Encratitism to the Aërians Thirdly Another of the Heresies of these Encratites was their rejecting much of the New Testament and in particular the Epistles of Paul But so far were the Aërians therefrom that they founded the Doctrine for which they are so much reproach'd by Epiphanius viz. that of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter on these very Epistles of Paul citing 1 Tâ—m 3. 4. 14. And the like places of Paul for Proofs of their Doctrine which afterward was done by Hierome and after him by the stream of Interpreters of these Places and others that handled that Subject and at this day by the Body of the Reformed Churches From all which is evident the falsehood of what Philastrius alledges and that the Aërians were far from being guilty of Encratitism or such Crimes but they must needs first suffer the persecution of tongues as a preamble and preparative to make them a Prey more obnoxious to the violent hands of these who are beginning to dote on the Romish Superstition § 15. And so it fell out For Epiphanius himself tells us that the Aërians were banish'd from Churches Lands Villages and Cities and that often times they lodg'd only in the open Air all covered with Snow and were oblig'd to seek shelter in the Woods and Rocks Now what was the cause of this so violent hatred and hot Persecution Was it their being guilty of Arrianism sure not For if we believe Epiphanius they were a branch of the Arrians and as he insinuats liv'd among them But suppose they did not we find no such Persecution of the Arrians on the account of their Faith in these times but only their Exclusion from the publick Churches They being permitted in the mean while to keep their Conventicles in privat Houses even at the very Gates of the greatest Cities Add hereto which we trust we have evinc'd that Aërius never Arrianiz'd and so they could not persecute him and his Followers upon this account From all that is now said 't is clear that we most seek another spring of this violent Hate and Persecution And this I think may easily be reach'd and perceiv'd to be nothing else but the passionat Zeal the World declining more and more after Anti-christian Superstition had for their set Lent-seasons their Fasts of their own making Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead their despotick Hierarchy and other such preparatives of the Man of Sin 's appearance all which were oppos'd by Aërius and his Followers with more Zeal than they were by any others in the World at that time and so had presently War made upon them by such as minded nothing more than worshipping the Rising-Sun of Unrighteousness And indeed to me the whole strain of Epiphanius his Discourse clearly intimats that not Arrianism but the opposing of these Dotages was the Ground of all this Hatred and Spight that was pour'd upon Aërius and his Adherents § 16. And now I have done with Philastrius only I must observe for which I mainly adduc'd him that in him there 's no mention of Aërius his Arrianism which tho' a negative Testimony yet exceedingly weakens that we have from Epiphanius Philastrius being a Bishop a Man of Credit and of no less Antiquity than the other In which Sentiment I am confirmed from Rabanus Maurus Bishop